A Broadband and ADSL forum. BroadbanterBanter

Welcome to BroadbanterBanter.

You are currently viewing as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today.

Go Back   Home » BroadbanterBanter forum » Newsgroup Discussions » uk.comp.home-networking (UK home networking)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.comp.home-networking (UK home networking) (uk.comp.home-networking) Discussion of all aspects of computer networking in the home, regardless of the platforms, software, topologies and protocols used. Examples of topics include recommendations for hardware or suppliers (e.g. NICs and cabling), protocols, servers, and specific network software. Advertising is not allowed.

S L O W Windows Networking



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 4th 09, 09:18 AM posted to uk.comp.home-networking
Stephen Ward
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 38
Default S L O W Windows Networking

In the off chance someone has an idea, what would be a logical
explanation to a couple of windows machines, linked via a simple cheap
switch, both forced to full duplex 100mb - taking nearly 2 days to
transfer 10 2gb files from one box to the other?

Should I focus on the core operating system, NIC's or switch. I have my
own inclination - but some other takes on it would be most welcome.

--
.. . .
  #2  
Old January 4th 09, 10:26 AM posted to uk.comp.home-networking
PeeGee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 311
Default S L O W Windows Networking

Stephen Ward wrote:
In the off chance someone has an idea, what would be a logical
explanation to a couple of windows machines, linked via a simple cheap
switch, both forced to full duplex 100mb - taking nearly 2 days to
transfer 10 2gb files from one box to the other?

Should I focus on the core operating system, NIC's or switch. I have my
own inclination - but some other takes on it would be most welcome.


That sounds a bit long .... for a 10Mb hub :-(

A bit more info could be useful: which operating system and service pack
(ISTR Vista had a problem with indexing and transfers for a large number
of files when the receiving folder was open);

why "force" 100Mb? what happens if you use auto-negotiate?

have you tried different cables?

--
PeeGee

"Nothing should be able to load itself onto a computer without the
knowledge or consent of the computer user. Software should also be able
to be removed from a computer easily."
Peter Cullen, Microsoft Chief Privacy Strategist (Computing 18 Aug 05)
  #3  
Old January 4th 09, 12:45 PM posted to uk.comp.home-networking
Conor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 161
Default S L O W Windows Networking

In article , Stephen Ward
says...
In the off chance someone has an idea, what would be a logical
explanation to a couple of windows machines, linked via a simple cheap
switch, both forced to full duplex 100mb - taking nearly 2 days to
transfer 10 2gb files from one box to the other?

Should I focus on the core operating system, NIC's or switch. I have my
own inclination - but some other takes on it would be most welcome.

Disable your AV software.

--
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams
  #4  
Old January 4th 09, 12:45 PM posted to uk.comp.home-networking
Stephen Ward
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 38
Default S L O W Windows Networking

On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 10:26:15 +0000, PeeGee wrote:

Stephen Ward wrote:
In the off chance someone has an idea, what would be a logical
explanation to a couple of windows machines, linked via a simple cheap
switch, both forced to full duplex 100mb - taking nearly 2 days to
transfer 10 2gb files from one box to the other?

Should I focus on the core operating system, NIC's or switch. I have my
own inclination - but some other takes on it would be most welcome.


That sounds a bit long .... for a 10Mb hub :-(

A bit more info could be useful: which operating system and service pack
(ISTR Vista had a problem with indexing and transfers for a large number
of files when the receiving folder was open);

why "force" 100Mb? what happens if you use auto-negotiate?

have you tried different cables?


There are a pair of old XP SP2 machines. I forced 100mbps FD on both in
an attempt to speed things up. It's made no difference from the previous
'auto-neg'. I don't get any issues when I kick stuff through the same
switch with smb on my linux boxes - it's just these two 'laughing boys'
that are acting up.

Cables have been changed (yep - been bitten on that before), switch ports
etc.



--
.. . .
  #5  
Old January 4th 09, 02:06 PM posted to uk.comp.home-networking
Alex Fraser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 553
Default S L O W Windows Networking

Stephen Ward wrote:
In the off chance someone has an idea, what would be a logical
explanation to a couple of windows machines, linked via a simple cheap
switch, both forced to full duplex 100mb - taking nearly 2 days to
transfer 10 2gb files from one box to the other?


Duplex mismatch seems a likely explanation. This results in erratic
transfer rates (see Task Manager Networking tab), usually no more than
200KB/s average, many Ethernet-level errors and TCP segment
retransmissions (see Network Interface and TCP performance counters in
perfmon).

Try forcing one or both ends to half duplex. For what it's worth, full
duplex makes little difference to performance if data is primarily going
one way - on an in-spec network, very little bandwidth is lost in
collisions.

Alex
  #6  
Old January 4th 09, 02:44 PM posted to uk.comp.home-networking
Stephen Ward
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 38
Default S L O W Windows Networking

On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 12:45:39 +0000, Conor wrote:

In article , Stephen Ward
says...
In the off chance someone has an idea, what would be a logical
explanation to a couple of windows machines, linked via a simple cheap
switch, both forced to full duplex 100mb - taking nearly 2 days to
transfer 10 2gb files from one box to the other?

Should I focus on the core operating system, NIC's or switch. I have my
own inclination - but some other takes on it would be most welcome.

Disable your AV software.


I'd already done that but thanks for the suggestion. Also kicked out the
old free 'zoneminder' that was running just in case that was messing with
it, but no dice.

I've got to thank Alex for his suggestions - my networking tab on task
manager gives me no throughput speed. It just shows the link at 100m and
a couple of % utilisation.



--
.. . .
  #7  
Old January 4th 09, 05:10 PM posted to uk.comp.home-networking
robert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 48
Default S L O W Windows Networking

Alex Fraser wrote:
Stephen Ward wrote:
In the off chance someone has an idea, what would be a logical
explanation to a couple of windows machines, linked via a simple cheap
switch, both forced to full duplex 100mb - taking nearly 2 days to
transfer 10 2gb files from one box to the other?


Duplex mismatch seems a likely explanation. This results in erratic
transfer rates (see Task Manager Networking tab), usually no more than
200KB/s average, many Ethernet-level errors and TCP segment
retransmissions (see Network Interface and TCP performance counters in
perfmon).

Try forcing one or both ends to half duplex. For what it's worth, full
duplex makes little difference to performance if data is primarily going
one way - on an in-spec network, very little bandwidth is lost in
collisions.

Alex

I've had problems with XP when trying to do more than 1 copy/move at the
same time between mapped drives. Everything grinds to a halt, I now try
to be patient and run one copy/move window at a time.
  #8  
Old January 4th 09, 06:00 PM posted to uk.comp.home-networking
Stephen Ward
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 38
Default S L O W Windows Networking

On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 17:10:50 +0000, robert wrote:

Alex Fraser wrote:
Stephen Ward wrote:
In the off chance someone has an idea, what would be a logical
explanation to a couple of windows machines, linked via a simple cheap
switch, both forced to full duplex 100mb - taking nearly 2 days to
transfer 10 2gb files from one box to the other?


Duplex mismatch seems a likely explanation. This results in erratic
transfer rates (see Task Manager Networking tab), usually no more than
200KB/s average, many Ethernet-level errors and TCP segment
retransmissions (see Network Interface and TCP performance counters in
perfmon).

Try forcing one or both ends to half duplex. For what it's worth, full
duplex makes little difference to performance if data is primarily
going one way - on an in-spec network, very little bandwidth is lost in
collisions.

Alex

I've had problems with XP when trying to do more than 1 copy/move at the
same time between mapped drives. Everything grinds to a halt, I now try
to be patient and run one copy/move window at a time.


It finally finished so to try and trouble shoot I've copied one 2g file
from each box through the same switch to a samba share on a linux box.
This was much quicker. It's really odd behaviour to see. The issue seems
to be when the only xp boxes I have try to talk. I may look at spending
some more time with it.



--
.. . .
  #9  
Old January 4th 09, 08:28 PM posted to uk.comp.home-networking
Alex Fraser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 553
Default S L O W Windows Networking

Stephen Ward wrote:
[snip]
It finally finished so to try and trouble shoot I've copied one 2g file
from each box through the same switch to a samba share on a linux box.
This was much quicker. It's really odd behaviour to see. The issue seems
to be when the only xp boxes I have try to talk. I may look at spending
some more time with it.


Do you see high CPU usage on either end? (On a relatively modern
machine, 100Mbit transfer should barely register.)

I've seen some strange behaviour on occasions caused by different
Windows versions, or different applied updates, that caused problems;
one obvious effect was that browsing a share was slow, with a
significant added delay for every level in the directory tree. I can't
remember if this affected transfer performance.

I don't have any particular recommendations for software (hopefully
someone else will suggest something), but it might be useful to try some
TCP throughput tests between the machines - if these are fine then it
strongly suggests the problem is specific to file sharing rather than a
more fundamental network problem.

Alex
  #10  
Old January 4th 09, 09:35 PM posted to uk.comp.home-networking
stephen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 381
Default S L O W Windows Networking

On 04 Jan 2009 18:00:01 GMT, Stephen Ward
wrote:

On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 17:10:50 +0000, robert wrote:

Alex Fraser wrote:
Stephen Ward wrote:
In the off chance someone has an idea, what would be a logical
explanation to a couple of windows machines, linked via a simple cheap
switch, both forced to full duplex 100mb - taking nearly 2 days to
transfer 10 2gb files from one box to the other?

Duplex mismatch seems a likely explanation. This results in erratic
transfer rates (see Task Manager Networking tab), usually no more than
200KB/s average, many Ethernet-level errors and TCP segment
retransmissions (see Network Interface and TCP performance counters in
perfmon).

Try forcing one or both ends to half duplex. For what it's worth, full
duplex makes little difference to performance if data is primarily
going one way - on an in-spec network, very little bandwidth is lost in
collisions.

Alex

I've had problems with XP when trying to do more than 1 copy/move at the
same time between mapped drives. Everything grinds to a halt, I now try
to be patient and run one copy/move window at a time.


It finally finished so to try and trouble shoot I've copied one 2g file
from each box through the same switch to a samba share on a linux box.
This was much quicker. It's really odd behaviour to see. The issue seems
to be when the only xp boxes I have try to talk. I may look at spending
some more time with it.


try wireshark on 1 or both of the PCs.

you should be able to capture part of the transfer and see what isnt
happening
--
Regards

- replace xyz with ntl
 




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Windows - Mac, networking help [email protected] uk.comp.home-networking (UK home networking) 1 November 16th 07 03:49 PM
Linux and Windows Networking Pib uk.comp.home-networking (UK home networking) 3 November 18th 06 10:37 AM
Which TCP ports does windows networking use? Gareth Halfacree uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 3 October 13th 06 11:12 PM
windows networking hassle Mike Scott uk.comp.home-networking (UK home networking) 2 January 8th 05 12:53 PM
Networking SUSE and Windows SpamFree uk.comp.home-networking (UK home networking) 1 June 6th 04 02:02 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2019 BroadbanterBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.