From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Tremer To: development@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Re: [Development] Fwd: samba tuning Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 11:05:08 +0100 Message-ID: <1332410708.16918.92.camel@rice-oxley.tremer.info> In-Reply-To: <4F6AEC26.3080109@ipfire.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7287755996734985278==" List-Id: --===============7287755996734985278== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi, I guess nobody ever checked them out. For at least sendfile: I believe that the first kernels that came with IPFire 2.1 did not have an implementation of sendfile. I additionally found, that the buffers are set to approx. 8kb which could also be increased. Supposedly, everyone has got enough of RAM. Please open a bug to track this feature and prepare a patch. Michael On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 10:08 +0100, WhyTea wrote: > Hi again! > > I've tested it again. Now with 1GBit/s > > without these parameters the write speed is about 23 MByte/s > withe these parameters the write speed is about 80 MByte/s > > So I ask again, is there any reason why we don't use them? > > - Daniel > > -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > Betreff: > samba tuning > Datum: > Wed, 14 Mar 2012 13:34:17 +0100 > Von: > Daniel Weismüller > > Antwort an: > whytea(a)ipfire.org > An: > development(a)lists.ipfire.org > > > Hi all, > > is there any reason why ipfire don't use the following parameters with > samba? > > use sendfile = 1 > aio read size = 1 > aio write size = 1 > > I've tested them and it brings my samba-performance from 8,9 MB/s up to > 9,2 MB/s (using 100Mbit/s fullduplex) > > - Daniel > > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > Development(a)lists.ipfire.org > http://lists.ipfire.org/mailman/listinfo/development --===============7287755996734985278==--