JT wrote:
"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in message
...
Per (PeteCresswell):
On all of
those tests, LAN Speed Test listed "Packet Length" as 1,000,000.
Reading here-and-there, I'm coming away suspicious of the 1,000,000
number. Yes, LanSpeedTest really did cite it.... but it's looking
unrealistic to me.
viz this quote from http://tinyurl.com/qz2j47e
"Long packets, such as the 1,518-byte packets we used, are a good way to
stress a network."
Also, I am getting the impression that Packet Length is determined by
applications and not globally for the entire network.
Am I on the right track?
Pete,
Not sure if this is applicable but,
I recently setup a small LAN with 1 Windows 2008 Server and 25 Windows 7
64-bit workstations and a NAS device.
Data transfer seemed slow (every device including Router and Ethernet switch
is gigabit)
I found this setting on the NIC's that made a huge difference on LAN
transfers of data. Large Send Offload v2 (IPv4)
This is found by right-clicking on your NIC (I assume you know how to get to
and change properties on your NIC, if not let me know) and selecting
Properties. Then click on "Configure" then click on the "Advanced" tab.
There are several parameters (depending on the manufacturer of your NIC)
that you can configure.
Large Send Offload v2 (IPv4) is enabled by default (I am assuming you are
using IPv4, if not select Large Send Offload v2 (IPv6)
By disabling this parameter my LAN speeds increased dramatically
specifically the backup to the NAS device.
I have begun to revisit some of my other recent installs and made this
change resulting in backup times going from several hours to less than 1
hour to the LAN NAS device.
Hope this helps!
JT
Some NICs are just badly designed. They cause an excessive number
of interrupts per handled packet. And no amount of fiddling with the
NDIS features, will rescue them.
And the after-market for NICs is practically gutted now. You just
can't find anything worth buying. Of the couple of Intel chips,
one seems to have an uncorrected driver problem. I want a chip like
the old Marvell one in my P4 machine, as that one worked well. I don't
know if it is an inability to support the latest NDIS that causes
chip designs to "fall out of the market" or what. But I wish the
process could be reversed.
Paul