I did some testing with 3.0 kernel (cifs client) and was getting 90% wire speeds writing cifs files to the server (Windows or Samba) On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Steve French <smfrench@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Writing from cifs kernel client to WIndows or Samba server should be much faster > than the reverse (ie large file sequential file copy to server is > faster than copying > a file from the server) cifs kernel client serializes reads from the same file > (unless mounting forcedirectio, in which case caching is disabled) and uses > a relatively smaller read size (16K) - while for writes they are sent > in parallel > even if to the same file (and the write size is much larger e.g. 126976 bytes, > and can be set even larger to Samba). There may be a few cases (such > as copying to WIndowsXP or Windows7) where timeouts on the > server slow things down (writing from linux client to Windows XP > or Windows 7) but what is the server type? > > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 7:14 AM, Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> On Thu, 18 Aug 2011, Justin Piszcz wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, 18 Aug 2011, J. R. Okajima wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Justin Piszcz: >>>>> >>>>> Does anyone know if any kernel supports CIFS w/out crashing? I'd like to >>>>> backup some CIFS shares, thanks. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> mount -t cifs //w2/x /mnt -o user=user,pass=pass >>>>> >>>>> [ 881.388836] CIFS VFS: cifs_mount failed w/return code = -22 >>>> >>>> ::: >>>> >>>> Since it failed mounting, this patch will help you. Although the patch >>>> will fix one bug, there still may exist another problem. >>>> >>>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-cifs&m=131345112022031&w=2 >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Latest patch (this one) applied to linux-3.1-rc2 works, at least it >>> mounted >>> this time and did not instantly crash the kernel! >>> >>> I also tried the hostname again (and it did not crash the kernel, but it >>> failed to mount). >>> >>> Used the IP and it mounted successfully: >>> //10.0.0.11/x 28T 5.0T 23T 19% /mnt >>> //10.0.0.11/y 19T 1.2T 18T 7% /mnt2 >>> >>> It has not crashed yet (which is good), I'll apply this patch to my >>> production machine and test taking backups of this data and let you know >>> if it crashes again, thanks! >>> >>> Justin. >> >> >> Hello, >> >> It is working but very slowly: >> >> Device eth6 [10.0.1.2] (1/1): >> ================================================================================ >> Incoming: Outgoing: >> Curr: 37.60 MByte/s Curr: 0.44 MByte/s >> Avg: 4.98 MByte/s Avg: 0.09 MByte/s >> Min: 0.00 MByte/s Min: 0.00 MByte/s >> Max: 40.79 MByte/s Max: 0.48 MByte/s >> Ttl: 1.45 GByte Ttl: 26.77 MByte >> >> Over 10GbE the other direction (Linux -> Windows (via Samba)) I get >> 500MiB/s, is CIFS slow? >> >> I'll look into options to tweak the speed but this is very poor speed when >> you have to transfer 5-10TB. However, it is not crashing anymore, so any >> speed is better than that :) >> >> Justin. >> >> > > > > -- > Thanks, > > Steve > -- Thanks, Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
