Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[fordem]

The impact of jumbo frame size will vary with the network and also the file sizes being transferred - with small files there may be little point to using jumbo frame - for me it doesn't matter if I use 4K or 9K throughput is pretty much constant.

Also, whilst jumbo frame will not work with wireless - it is a gigabit only technology - there is no need to disable it when using wireless, as it will automatically negotiate the MSS or maximum segment size.

For clarity - in a mixed network where both gigabit with jumbo frame & wireless access are used, jumbo frame can be left enabled all the time.

A bit of network trivia now - jumbo frame is defined as an ethernet frame size larger than the default 1500 bytes - 802.11 allows framesizes upto 2327 bytes - so technically wireless does support jumbo frame.

[stillerz]

Assuming this is a wireless-related problem, are there settings in the network adapter properties that would make a difference?  I'm just using all the default settings currently.  The Dell Studio 1737 comes with the Dell 1510 Wireless-N Mini-Card.

I checked on the DIR-655 and there doesn't appear to be any wireless network tuning options that would help.  I'm just running all the default settings there anyway.

[gunrunnerjohn]

Again, I don't think you can expect much better over wireless links.  Did you try FTP, as it should give you a faster transfer over the same link.

[stillerz]

I did try ftp, but Vista doesn't show the transfer speed when copying a file using ftp, so I couldn't tell if it was faster.  It felt about the same, judging by the time it took to copy.

[gunrunnerjohn]

I copy a big file and use a stopwatch to time transfers.

[stillerz]

Thanks -- i could do that, but ftp really isn't going to work for me anyway.  I need to use a drive letter for the applications I'm working with to be able to save and copy files to that network drive.  FTP would add an extra step, which would take more time even if it was slightly faster.

[gunrunnerjohn]

I think you need to look into wired solutions.  Wireless just isn't going to be that fast for SMB transfers, that's just how it works.

[stillerz]

I did try connecting directly to the wired network on a port on the router (its a gigabit router) and my copy times from my Vista laptop only went up to about 6 Mb/s for a 130Mb folder copy (bunch of smaller files).  Got up to about 7.5 Mb/s on a large folder copy of 7Gb files.

I'm seeing the same performance from my Dell desktop also, which is a wired connection.

I was really hoping to see something in the 18Mb/s+ range, which makes me wonder if there isn't something wrong with the router v1.08 firmware or config.

Or, if I just have a defective DNS-323?

[fordem]

Does your laptop also have a gigabit connection?  Generally smaller files will transfer slower - you should see 18MByte/sec and higher with files of 1~2 GBytes.

By the way - Mb/s is generally used to indicate Megabits/sec, so to avoid confusion I spell it out 

[gunrunnerjohn]

I get 18-20 mbyte/sec transfers each way from my DNS-323 on a gigabit connection formatted in RAID-1 with a pair of Samsung 1.5TB drives.  I'm running jumbo frames at 4kbit size, 9kbit didn't seem to have a positive effect.

I only get 8-9mbyte/sec on 100mbit links.

[stillerz]

Yes, both my laptop and desktop have gigabit wired connections, which is why I'm wondering if the problem is either with the DNS-323 itself or Vista.  I have another laptop that I can dual boot into XP that I'll try out also.

[krenkey]

get a ftp client filezilla is free and easy to use it will show you your speeds to the NAS

[Oman]

Is your laptop Vista as well?  I get about 1/2 the SMB speed out of Vista than I do with my XP box.  Both Gigabit connections and the Vista box has way more CPU and HD speed.

There are two things I did to Vista to even get up to that speed:

1) Turned auto-tune off on the network card in Vista.  Do a google search and you should find lots of info.
2) Don't browse to any directories on the NAS.  Vista seems to have this habit of reading EVERY BYTE OF EVERY FILE in the directory you browse to, in the background.  I suppose it is to try to get metadata or something.   I have some large directories and Vista can drive the NAS at 100% for 30 minutes by just bringing up the folder in Explorer.  You don't notice it on the host at all, but the NAS just gets hammered.

I like Vista except for the horrible network and explorer performance.

Jon

[stillerz]

Yes, I have two laptops and both run Vista.  One of the two is a dual-boot system, so I can run XP also.

Performance seems to be about the same regardless of the laptop or OS, which is why I started wondering if it was related to the network itself.

I have disabled autotuning on Vista, and didn't notice much difference.  I have not attempted to change any of the wireless or wired network card parameters via device manager though.  I didn't see any obvious looking options when I checked them out.