On Fri, 2004-06-25 at 12:11 -0400, Kwan Lowe wrote:
> Robert Foxworth wrote:
>
> >
> > I haven't specifically checked 9x, but perhaps his ping test is with
> > a win9x machine. I seem to recall there was a step in granularity
> > between 1 and 10 ms in the RTT resolved (shown) time. We get "spoiled"
> > with Linux and its much more precise RTT display. I know that
> > the ping utility in XP will show the difference between say 9 and 10
> > ms, and will show <1 ms. (the RTT to my firewall, on 10 Mbit)
>
> Your post made me recall something from way back...
>
> I spent the last ten minutes trying to pull up a Usenet comment I posted
> several years ago concerning Samba running pathetically slowly on
> win9x networks. There was one really odd suggestion that someone had
> made -- map a drive instead of accessing through explorer. At first I'd
> dismissed it, but when I tried it radically improved the performance. It
> could have been a coincidence, and I've not had reason to try it out
> again, but if nothing else is working...
Yeah, mapped drives are persistent connections to the samba server.
Server response appears faster because the server has less to do, since
you're already authenticated on that connection there isn't any
additional auth needed. also you've already been resolved through
reverse dns for logging so that's done. Mapped drives should give you
wire speed to the hard disk.
austin theen
-- Public key ID: 8EB18AD6 Public key available at subkeys.pgp.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 18:16:02 EDT