LAN transfer rate improvement?

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Previously jtsnow <jtsnow@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Im doing drive image backups over a 100baseT LAN using Norton Ghost from a
> PC P4 w/XP to a network storage device.
> Looks like the transfer rate over LAN is about 25 Megbit/s and LAN shows 25%
> utilization and CPU about 50%. Drive is only being accessed about 1/3 the
> time so drive is not limiting the data transfer.

> This is a small home LAN with 4 PCs, a NAS and a printer attached.

> Is 25 Mbit/s about the best one can reasonably expect to get on a 100 baseT?
> Even at that rate, a 44 Gig backup can take a few hours.

Definitiely not! You should get 70-95Mbit/s. I see 93Mbit/s and 4% CPU
load in a quick test with netperf TCP stream here.

Maybe some interrupt conflict? Or is the card used in a polling mode?

> Are there ways to easily tweek the LAN to get significant transfer rate
> performance improvements? Or is 25% utilization the best I should expect
> on a 100mb/s LAN?

Actually you should see far less utilisation. If this is really
utilisation from the network access, then something is wrong.
Even with PIO instead of DMA the card should not eat that much CPU.

One thing you can try is moving the card around (to make it use
a different interrupt). Another is installing current drivers
from the manufaturer.

Arno
--
For email address: lastname AT tik DOT ee DOT ethz DOT ch
GnuPG: ID:1E25338F FP:0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws" - Tacitus

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

In article <B1FNd.83176$Tf5.9829@lakeread03>, jtsnow@yahoo.com says...
> Im doing drive image backups over a 100baseT LAN using Norton Ghost from a
> PC P4 w/XP to a network storage device.
> Looks like the transfer rate over LAN is about 25 Megbit/s and LAN shows 25%
> utilization and CPU about 50%. Drive is only being accessed about 1/3 the
> time so drive is not limiting the data transfer.
>
> This is a small home LAN with 4 PCs, a NAS and a printer attached.
>
> Is 25 Mbit/s about the best one can reasonably expect to get on a 100 baseT?
> Even at that rate, a 44 Gig backup can take a few hours.
>
> Are there ways to easily tweek the LAN to get significant transfer rate
> performance improvements? Or is 25% utilization the best I should expect
> on a 100mb/s LAN?
>
> Any tips appreciated.

Use a program running under BartPE, like GHOST32.EXE or Drive Snapshot
(wich can run under Windows). You'll get closer to 100% throughput on
FastEthernet.

http://www.nu2.nu/pebuilder/
http://www.nu2.nu/pebuilder/pluginhelp/ghost.htm
http://www.drivesnapshot.de/en/

--
ICQ# 114297372

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

jtsnow <jtsnow@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:B1FNd.83176$Tf5.9829@lakeread03...

> Im doing drive image backups over a 100baseT LAN using Norton Ghost from a PC
> P4 w/XP to a network storage device.

> Looks like the transfer rate over LAN is about 25 Megbit/s and LAN shows 25%
> utilization and CPU about 50%. Drive is only being accessed about 1/3 the
> time so drive is not limiting the data transfer.

> This is a small home LAN with 4 PCs, a NAS and a printer attached.

> Is 25 Mbit/s about the best one can reasonably expect to get on a 100 baseT?

With the current Ghost, yes.

The current True Image isnt any better on that.

> Even at that rate, a 44 Gig backup can take a few hours.

> Are there ways to easily tweek the LAN to get significant transfer rate
> performance improvements?

Its not the lan, and you can prove that by doing a simple file transfer.

> Or is 25% utilization the best I should expect on a 100mb/s LAN?

Best you can get with the current imaging apps, yes.

> Any tips appreciated.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"jtsnow" <jtsnow@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:B1FNd.83176$Tf5.9829@lakeread03...
> Im doing drive image backups over a 100baseT LAN using Norton Ghost from a
> PC P4 w/XP to a network storage device.
> Looks like the transfer rate over LAN is about 25 Megbit/s and LAN shows
> 25% utilization and CPU about 50%. Drive is only being accessed about
> 1/3 the time so drive is not limiting the data transfer.
>
> This is a small home LAN with 4 PCs, a NAS and a printer attached.
>
> Is 25 Mbit/s about the best one can reasonably expect to get on a 100
> baseT? Even at that rate, a 44 Gig backup can take a few hours.
>
> Are there ways to easily tweek the LAN to get significant transfer rate
> performance improvements? Or is 25% utilization the best I should expect
> on a 100mb/s LAN?
>
> Any tips appreciated.
>
I do about 30Mbit/s on large files. I believe it is not the tcp/ip but it is
the delays in reading and writing hard drives, buffer size and other
overhead.

Sandra reports about 80 Mbits/s for all my connections using 100Base TX..
JPS

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

i was thinking it wasnt the HD accesses becuase the access light is only on
at most about 30% of the time. That tells me its not the HD as the
bottleneck
"jpsga" <jpsga@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:NMydnTonzMjb25XfRVn-3w@comcast.com...
>
> "jtsnow" <jtsnow@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:B1FNd.83176$Tf5.9829@lakeread03...
>> Im doing drive image backups over a 100baseT LAN using Norton Ghost from
>> a PC P4 w/XP to a network storage device.
>> Looks like the transfer rate over LAN is about 25 Megbit/s and LAN shows
>> 25% utilization and CPU about 50%. Drive is only being accessed about
>> 1/3 the time so drive is not limiting the data transfer.
>>
>> This is a small home LAN with 4 PCs, a NAS and a printer attached.
>>
>> Is 25 Mbit/s about the best one can reasonably expect to get on a 100
>> baseT? Even at that rate, a 44 Gig backup can take a few hours.
>>
>> Are there ways to easily tweek the LAN to get significant transfer rate
>> performance improvements? Or is 25% utilization the best I should
>> expect on a 100mb/s LAN?
>>
>> Any tips appreciated.
>>
> I do about 30Mbit/s on large files. I believe it is not the tcp/ip but it
> is the delays in reading and writing hard drives, buffer size and other
> overhead.
>
> Sandra reports about 80 Mbits/s for all my connections using 100Base TX..
> JPS
>
>
>

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Paul Atreides" <ardennes@free.fr> wrote in message
news:MPG.1c719918d134958b989777@news.free.fr...
> In article <B1FNd.83176$Tf5.9829@lakeread03>, jtsnow@yahoo.com says...
>> Im doing drive image backups over a 100baseT LAN using Norton Ghost from a
>> PC P4 w/XP to a network storage device.
>> Looks like the transfer rate over LAN is about 25 Megbit/s and LAN shows 25%
>> utilization and CPU about 50%. Drive is only being accessed about 1/3 the
>> time so drive is not limiting the data transfer.
>>
>> This is a small home LAN with 4 PCs, a NAS and a printer attached.
>>
>> Is 25 Mbit/s about the best one can reasonably expect to get on a 100 baseT?
>> Even at that rate, a 44 Gig backup can take a few hours.
>>
>> Are there ways to easily tweek the LAN to get significant transfer rate
>> performance improvements? Or is 25% utilization the best I should expect
>> on a 100mb/s LAN?
>>
>> Any tips appreciated.
>
> Use a program running under BartPE, like GHOST32.EXE or Drive Snapshot
> (wich can run under Windows). You'll get closer to 100% throughput on
> FastEthernet.
>
> http://www.nu2.nu/pebuilder/
> http://www.nu2.nu/pebuilder/pluginhelp/ghost.htm
> http://www.drivesnapshot.de/en/

The other consideration tho is that more modern apps
do allow incremental images which drastically reduce
the volume that needs to be moved over the lan when
used properly and in the case of ghost32 dont need
to leave Win to do the image creation.

There is a real sense in which the time to create the
image isnt as important when it can be done at the Win
level and you can keep using the system while it happens.

And if you do need the minimum time to create an image,
there is a lot to be said for doing that to a local drive and
then moving the image file to a drive on the lan if you want
to protect against drastic failure of the system being imaged
or theft, fire damage etc of that.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Which version of Ghost?
How is your network storage device connected to network?

"jtsnow" <jtsnow@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:B1FNd.83176$Tf5.9829@lakeread03...
> Im doing drive image backups over a 100baseT LAN using Norton Ghost from a
> PC P4 w/XP to a network storage device.
> Looks like the transfer rate over LAN is about 25 Megbit/s and LAN shows
25%
> utilization and CPU about 50%. Drive is only being accessed about 1/3
the
> time so drive is not limiting the data transfer.
>
> This is a small home LAN with 4 PCs, a NAS and a printer attached.
>
> Is 25 Mbit/s about the best one can reasonably expect to get on a 100
baseT?
> Even at that rate, a 44 Gig backup can take a few hours.
>
> Are there ways to easily tweek the LAN to get significant transfer rate
> performance improvements? Or is 25% utilization the best I should expect
> on a 100mb/s LAN?
>
> Any tips appreciated.
>
>

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

jtsnow <jtsnow@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:jLXNd.83225$Tf5.58979@lakeread03...

> i was thinking it wasnt the HD accesses becuase the access light is only on at
> most about 30% of the time. That tells me its not the HD as the bottleneck

Yeah, its certainly ghost.

The evidence for that is that you can move a file over
the lan at the win level with a much higher link utilisation.


> "jpsga" <jpsga@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:NMydnTonzMjb25XfRVn-3w@comcast.com...
>>
>> "jtsnow" <jtsnow@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:B1FNd.83176$Tf5.9829@lakeread03...
>>> Im doing drive image backups over a 100baseT LAN using Norton Ghost from a
>>> PC P4 w/XP to a network storage device.
>>> Looks like the transfer rate over LAN is about 25 Megbit/s and LAN shows 25%
>>> utilization and CPU about 50%. Drive is only being accessed about 1/3 the
>>> time so drive is not limiting the data transfer.
>>>
>>> This is a small home LAN with 4 PCs, a NAS and a printer attached.
>>>
>>> Is 25 Mbit/s about the best one can reasonably expect to get on a 100 baseT?
>>> Even at that rate, a 44 Gig backup can take a few hours.
>>>
>>> Are there ways to easily tweek the LAN to get significant transfer rate
>>> performance improvements? Or is 25% utilization the best I should expect
>>> on a 100mb/s LAN?
>>>
>>> Any tips appreciated.
>>>
>> I do about 30Mbit/s on large files. I believe it is not the tcp/ip but it is
>> the delays in reading and writing hard drives, buffer size and other
>> overhead.
>>
>> Sandra reports about 80 Mbits/s for all my connections using 100Base TX..
>> JPS
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

i dont think so.....its the same
"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:36r9g9F54c228U1@individual.net...
>
> jtsnow <jtsnow@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:jLXNd.83225$Tf5.58979@lakeread03...
>
>> i was thinking it wasnt the HD accesses becuase the access light is only
>> on at most about 30% of the time. That tells me its not the HD as the
>> bottleneck
>
> Yeah, its certainly ghost.
>
> The evidence for that is that you can move a file over
> the lan at the win level with a much higher link utilisation.
>
>
>> "jpsga" <jpsga@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:NMydnTonzMjb25XfRVn-3w@comcast.com...
>>>
>>> "jtsnow" <jtsnow@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:B1FNd.83176$Tf5.9829@lakeread03...
>>>> Im doing drive image backups over a 100baseT LAN using Norton Ghost
>>>> from a PC P4 w/XP to a network storage device.
>>>> Looks like the transfer rate over LAN is about 25 Megbit/s and LAN
>>>> shows 25% utilization and CPU about 50%. Drive is only being accessed
>>>> about 1/3 the time so drive is not limiting the data transfer.
>>>>
>>>> This is a small home LAN with 4 PCs, a NAS and a printer attached.
>>>>
>>>> Is 25 Mbit/s about the best one can reasonably expect to get on a 100
>>>> baseT? Even at that rate, a 44 Gig backup can take a few hours.
>>>>
>>>> Are there ways to easily tweek the LAN to get significant transfer rate
>>>> performance improvements? Or is 25% utilization the best I should
>>>> expect on a 100mb/s LAN?
>>>>
>>>> Any tips appreciated.
>>>>
>>> I do about 30Mbit/s on large files. I believe it is not the tcp/ip but
>>> it is the delays in reading and writing hard drives, buffer size and
>>> other overhead.
>>>
>>> Sandra reports about 80 Mbits/s for all my connections using 100Base
>>> TX..
>>> JPS
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

jtsnow <jtsnow@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news 4%Nd.83232$Tf5.36186@lakeread03...

> i dont think so.....its the same

Not here it aint.

Must be something seriously screwed with nic etc.


> "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:36r9g9F54c228U1@individual.net...
>>
>> jtsnow <jtsnow@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:jLXNd.83225$Tf5.58979@lakeread03...
>>
>>> i was thinking it wasnt the HD accesses becuase the access light is only on
>>> at most about 30% of the time. That tells me its not the HD as the
>>> bottleneck
>>
>> Yeah, its certainly ghost.
>>
>> The evidence for that is that you can move a file over
>> the lan at the win level with a much higher link utilisation.
>>
>>
>>> "jpsga" <jpsga@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>> news:NMydnTonzMjb25XfRVn-3w@comcast.com...
>>>>
>>>> "jtsnow" <jtsnow@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:B1FNd.83176$Tf5.9829@lakeread03...
>>>>> Im doing drive image backups over a 100baseT LAN using Norton Ghost from a
>>>>> PC P4 w/XP to a network storage device.
>>>>> Looks like the transfer rate over LAN is about 25 Megbit/s and LAN shows
>>>>> 25% utilization and CPU about 50%. Drive is only being accessed about
>>>>> 1/3 the time so drive is not limiting the data transfer.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is a small home LAN with 4 PCs, a NAS and a printer attached.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is 25 Mbit/s about the best one can reasonably expect to get on a 100
>>>>> baseT? Even at that rate, a 44 Gig backup can take a few hours.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are there ways to easily tweek the LAN to get significant transfer rate
>>>>> performance improvements? Or is 25% utilization the best I should expect
>>>>> on a 100mb/s LAN?
>>>>>
>>>>> Any tips appreciated.
>>>>>
>>>> I do about 30Mbit/s on large files. I believe it is not the tcp/ip but it
>>>> is the delays in reading and writing hard drives, buffer size and other
>>>> overhead.
>>>>
>>>> Sandra reports about 80 Mbits/s for all my connections using 100Base TX..
>>>> JPS
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>