Samba: 500MBit, Iperf 100Mbit, ftp 800Mbit

    • Samba: 500MBit, Iperf 100Mbit, ftp 800Mbit

      Hello,

      I was surprised to see Samba doing only 50MB/s (Helios LAN Test). So I checked with Iperf3:

      Source Code

      1. iperf3 -c 192.168.177.20 -p 5201 -b 100M --get-server-output
      2. Connecting to host 192.168.177.20, port 5201
      3. [ 4] local 192.168.177.3 port 43856 connected to 192.168.177.20 port 5201
      4. [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr Cwnd
      5. [ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 10.8 MBytes 90.6 Mbits/sec 0 25.7 KBytes
      6. [ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 11.7 MBytes 98.2 Mbits/sec 0 25.7 KBytes
      7. [ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 11.6 MBytes 97.6 Mbits/sec 0 25.7 KBytes
      8. [ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 11.7 MBytes 98.2 Mbits/sec 0 25.7 KBytes
      9. [ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 11.6 MBytes 97.6 Mbits/sec 0 25.7 KBytes
      10. [ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 11.7 MBytes 98.2 Mbits/sec 0 25.7 KBytes
      11. [ 4] 6.00-7.00 sec 11.6 MBytes 97.1 Mbits/sec 0 25.7 KBytes
      12. [ 4] 7.00-8.00 sec 11.8 MBytes 98.7 Mbits/sec 0 25.7 KBytes
      13. [ 4] 8.00-9.00 sec 11.7 MBytes 98.2 Mbits/sec 0 25.7 KBytes
      14. [ 4] 9.00-10.00 sec 11.5 MBytes 96.6 Mbits/sec 0 25.7 KBytes
      15. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
      16. [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr
      17. [ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 116 MBytes 97.1 Mbits/sec 0 sender
      18. [ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 116 MBytes 96.9 Mbits/sec receiver
      19. Server output:
      20. Accepted connection from 192.168.177.3, port 43854
      21. [ 5] local 192.168.177.20 port 5201 connected to 192.168.177.3 port 43856
      22. [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
      23. [ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 10.2 MBytes 85.4 Mbits/sec
      24. [ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 11.7 MBytes 98.0 Mbits/sec
      25. [ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 11.7 MBytes 98.0 Mbits/sec
      26. [ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 11.6 MBytes 97.7 Mbits/sec
      27. [ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 11.7 MBytes 97.9 Mbits/sec
      28. [ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 11.7 MBytes 98.0 Mbits/sec
      29. [ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 11.6 MBytes 97.4 Mbits/sec
      30. [ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 11.7 MBytes 98.3 Mbits/sec
      31. [ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 11.7 MBytes 98.4 Mbits/sec
      32. [ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 11.5 MBytes 96.6 Mbits/sec
      33. [ 5] 10.00-10.04 sec 445 KBytes 95.7 Mbits/sec
      34. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
      35. [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
      36. [ 5] 0.00-10.04 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec sender
      37. [ 5] 0.00-10.04 sec 116 MBytes 96.6 Mbits/sec receiver
      Display All

      I find this really odd. Iperf should always be faster, shouldn't it?

      Then I tested FTP and I get 100MByte/s, so about 800Mbit/s.

      What could be the reason?

      The CPU is a Pentium CPU G3220 @ 3.00GHz on the OMV Machine. The client runs W10 and is a Ryzen 2600. So, both should have enough RPM...

      Greetings,
      Hendrik
    • henfri wrote:

      Why is that?

      See link at the bottom of forum.armbian.com/topic/8097-n…ab=comments#comment-61898

      In Armbian we have 'armbianmonitor -u' functionality so if you run OMV on an ARM device it's pretty easy to provide support information. On x86 there's nothing and I'm too tired to ask for individual output from dmesg, /var/log/syslog, 'ip addr' and so on...
    • henfri wrote:

      Is there a reason why the monitor script cannot be ported to x86?

      There's nothing to port since it works there too. But the real monitoring is done in the background by a dedicated service we wrote and this would need to be maintained. In Armbian it's part of the 'distro' while on x86 there's nothing.

      And I don't see the point to support x86 since all those low-end x86 OMV installations perform lower than the good ARM thingies. And at the same time x86 wastes way more energy.
    • Users Online 1

      1 Guest