From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Tvrtko A. Ursulin" Subject: Re: Bonding gigabit and fast? Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 07:37:12 +0000 Message-ID: <200812170737.12575.tvrtko@ursulin.net> References: <200812161939.30033.tvrtko@ursulin.net> <4948119B.5050000@redhat.com> <200812162255.47731.tvrtko@ursulin.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Chris Snook Return-path: Received: from mk-outboundfilter-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com ([212.74.114.32]:64526 "EHLO mk-outboundfilter-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752908AbYLQHhS (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Dec 2008 02:37:18 -0500 In-Reply-To: <200812162255.47731.tvrtko@ursulin.net> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tuesday 16 December 2008 22:55:47 Tvrtko A. Ursulin wrote: > So this points to Samba/scheduler/CIFS client regression I think. I'll try > to do more testing in the following days. All this assuming that ~22Mb/s is > the best this machine can do and only hunting for slow and unstable speed > over Samba. In the morning I am not so sure about this any more. Problem is there is no regression with fast ethernet and it being faster than gigabit it moves the blame back to networking/skge. Do you any ideas for further tests which could clarify this? Thanks, Tvrtko