On 901816324 seconds since the Beginning of the UNIX epoch
Andrew Gillham wrote:
>
>Manuel Bouyer writes:
>> On Thu, Jul 30, 1998 at 12:51:38PM +0200, Frank van der Linden wrote:
>> > ..however, 40KB/s is very slow, and it is unlikely to be be caused by that
>.
>> > I have seen the maximum performance go from ~10MB/s down to ~6MB/s because
>> > of a suboptimal driver, but 40KB/s..
>> > 
>> 
>> Ops, I've read this much too quickly. I read it as "40 Mb".
>> Please ignore my previous post, It is innacurate.
>> 
>> Maybe there is some packets drop somewhere ? However. I think TCP should
>> adjust itself ...
>> 
>> I have a similar problem with my brand new 100Mb switch : I get 10KB/s
>> with TCP (ftp, scp, ...) and 8MB/s with NFS (which uses UDP).
>> I get very good perfs with a 100Mb hub.
>> Now I need to find a serial console to look at the swicth's config ...
>
>Hmm.  The problem I observed with "poor performance", resulted in very
>slow TCP (ftp mostly), and essentially broken NFS.  Switching the NFS
>connections to TCP helped for a bit (I thought), but ended up failing in
>the same manner.  That your NFS is working makes me think it isn't the
>NWAY negotiation necessarily.  Still, I would recommend forcing your
>switch port 10Mb and see what kind of difference it makes.
>
>-Andrew
>-- 
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>Andrew Gillham                            | This space left blank
>gillham@whirlpool.com                     | inadvertently.
>I speak for myself, not for my employer.  | Contact the publisher.
>

I've also had some problems with this card.  I ended up throwing a
de in there -- and NFS started working again.

Check out PR#5463.  This describes that the driver is dropping packets
when they come in a bit quickly.

 == Roland