Arch Linux

stingray

Member

From: Lima, Peru SA

Registered: 2006-03-24

Posts: 188

faster copy over network? [Solved] Use Linux!

I'm wondering if there is a different way to copy files over a network that would be faster.

I'm running an updated version of ArchLinux, no gui, just command line.
I have samba working to see windows shares and have mounted a share.

I use "cp" to copy a file from the win98 share to my local harddrive.  The file is about 670 megs. Every thing works great.

It takes 5 min 40 seconds to copy. 

When I copy the same file using "copy" from a win98 computer it's done in just under 4 min.

Any suggestions?

smbmount //comp_lab_server/admin /mnt/winshare
cp /mnt/winshare/images/admin.zip /mnt/localdrive/admin.zip

jerem

Member

From: France

Registered: 2005-01-15

Posts: 310

Re: faster copy over network? [Solved] Use Linux!

If I correctly understood what you exactly did, I would **guess** that :

* using cp : the copy uses the smbfs module in the kernel to retrieve the file from the win98 server.

* using copy : well, linux running samba is known to be generally faster than native windows services...

The two methods have different results because the copy goes through different processes, different layers, on different systems.

Using smbfs apparently involves some overhead(given your figures).

Disks could also have different I/O speeds...

stingray

Member

From: Lima, Peru SA

Registered: 2006-03-24

Posts: 188

Re: faster copy over network? [Solved] Use Linux!

If I correctly understood what you exactly did, I would **guess** that :

Yes, not real clear, I wrote this real fast before running out the door...

* using cp : the copy uses the smbfs module in the kernel to retrieve the file from the win98 server.

* using copy : well, linux running samba is known to be generally faster than native windows services...

  generally faster... that's what I was looking for, but it just seams quite a bit slower

The two methods have different results because the copy goes through different processes, different layers, on different systems.

Using smbfs apparently involves some overhead(given your figures).

ok, that helps, I was just making sure I wasn't missing some other great tool that was known to copy files faster.

Disks could also have different I/O speeds...

nope, same computers (dual booting), same disks..

Thanks for you help!

Rick

stingray

Member

From: Lima, Peru SA

Registered: 2006-03-24

Posts: 188

Re: faster copy over network? [Solved] Use Linux!

For what it's worth...  Use Linux!

Just to test it I setup a NFS share on a Linux computer to test the copy from linux to linux.  The copy took 1 min 15 seconds.  Which blows away the 4 min between windows computer, and the 5 min 40 seconds between linux client and windows server (using samba).

So I'm happy, now all I have to do is talk my boss into letting me use one of the computers for a linux server.

ravster

Member

From: Queen's U, Kingston, Canada

Registered: 2004-05-02

Posts: 285

Website

Re: faster copy over network? [Solved] Use Linux!

Hmm, I should learn more about NFS shares.
  I used to use shfs and found it wonderful, but it's been out of development for some time now and wouldn't work with anything above kerne-2.6.18.
  sftp does work, but it is extremely slow.
  NFS, here I come!! :? 
Ravster

---

ravidesai.com

jerem

Member

From: France

Registered: 2005-01-15

Posts: 310

Re: faster copy over network? [Solved] Use Linux!

Btw, what about nfsv4 support in Arch ?

stingray

Member

From: Lima, Peru SA

Registered: 2006-03-24

Posts: 188

Re: faster copy over network? [Solved] Use Linux!

Btw, what about nfsv4 support in Arch ?

It looks like it has it, it shows it running versions 2,3, and 4 when I do "rpcinfo -p"

Other than that, I have no idea?

stingray

Member

From: Lima, Peru SA

Registered: 2006-03-24

Posts: 188

Re: faster copy over network? [Solved] Use Linux!

I think I have to take back some of my excitment... as I ran some other test, my "server" that I setup with linux turned out to be faster (hardware or harddisk) than the real server I was using originaly with window...

NFS still seams faster than samba/windows, but probably not quite as much faster as I first believed...