Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!watmath!iuvax!purdue!haven!grebyn!pat From: pat@grebyn.com (Pat Bahn) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip Subject: Re: MacII FTP speeds on Ethernet Message-ID: <12260@grebyn.com> Date: 11 Aug 89 15:00:13 GMT References: <3258@internal.Apple.COM> Reply-To: pat@grebyn.UUCP (Pat Bahn) Organization: Grebyn Corp., Vienna, VA, USA Lines: 91 In article <3258@internal.Apple.COM> desnoyer@apple.com (Peter Desnoyers) writes: >In article <8907250124.AA23044@multimax.encore.com> bzs@ENCORE.COM (Barry >Shein) writes: >> >Can somebody tell me what the bottleneck is on FTP transfer rates for >> >a MacII on ethernet? I am running two MacII's on a subnet in the > >The numbers I have seen for memory-to-memory MacTCP and AppleTalk >transaction protocol performance are very close. I would suspect that >the actual hardware driver that receives the packet (and is common >to both stacks) is the bottleneck. > >That bottleneck is about an order of magnitude faster than the FTP >performance I see to a Sun (about 35kbyte/s, like Barry). > Barry You are doing approximately 3.5 times faster on your FTP then I was doing on a benchmark we had using a mac2x and a mac2. We felt the bottleneck was the disks as using an excelan LANALYZER we observed peak performance in excess of 100kbs so the card and memory were capable of quite a good clip. The only parameters that might help may involve increasing the memory buffers FTP uses. We had notoriously slow disks on our system. Unless you want to buy some disks there is nothing you can do. AS an experiment get some software for a turbo disk (quasidisk, whatever) and see if that helps you out. I would not expect you to ever beat 100kbs though. If you do let me know I am very interested. >> I believe if you run benchmarks writing the disk locally you'll find >> it peaks at around 50K bytes/sec. With the additional overhead of the >> network activity (those disks are all PIO, right?) you're probably >> doing well at those speeds. >My SC80 runs considerably faster than that. (I did a quick-and-dirty >benchmark just now and got ~150kbyte/s to duplicate a file. One-way >performance should be better.) My guess is that the bottleneck is in >NCSA Telnet, or at least in its interface with MacTCP and the file system. > Peter Desnoyers > I have one caveat, the work I was doing involved AUX on both systems. I would expect MACOS stuff to run faster as the system is more mature and has a better design. But I would look at the disks as the problem. We felt the bus and memory were more then fast enough and that the CPU had the throughput. But we saw a large variance as we changed disks around. I did not have the documentation on how to tune FTP so I don't know what was possible, but I don't think the MACTCP or the file system is it. Pat B Stuff follows to defeat inews. type n to escape. A A A A A -- ============================================================================= Pat @ grebyn.com | If the human mind was simple enough to understand, 301-948-8142 | We'd be too simple to understand it. =============================================================================