[cifs-discuss] CIFS performance - Solaris 10 and OpenSolaris

[Jay Seaman - GE Enterprise Architect]

Thanks-

samba is disabled (I actually removed the pkg)

I read the docs and didn't find much that pointed out anything I was  
missing.

I am running OpenSolaris 101b - I guess I could upgrade to a newer  
build from a development source....

Here's a little picture of what Windows shows when I map a network  
drive, which is confusing




And despite rebooting both my Windows client and the OpenSolaris  
server, stopping the service, destroying and recreating the file  
system, I'm still experiencing poor performance.

I have one zpool on the X4500 raidz with a single drive from each  
controller - lots of unused drives at the moment
and one file system on that zpool

Again, any thoughts would be appreciated.
On Mar 25, 2009, at 8:50 PM, Alan.M.Wright wrote:

>> There may be a better place to post this, but I'm not sure where :)
>
> cifs-discuss at opensolaris.org
>
>> 1) I thought the point of the "integrated SMB stack" in OpenSolaris
>> was that it was kernel based and faster than the Samba offering
>> in Solaris 10? When I connect my network share from the
>> Windows client, it reports it is connected to "Samba 3.0.28".  
>> Confusing....
>
> http://opensolaris.org/os/project/cifs-server/docs/
>
> Solaris CIFS Administration Guide:
> http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/820-2429
>
> This section might be of interest:
>
>   Before You Begin
>   -------------------------
>   If the Samba service is running on the Solaris system,
>   you must disable it. See How to Disable the Samba Service.
>
>> 2) Performance is slower with OpenSolaris than Solaris 10.
>> Slow enough that the test suite won't complete. The tests
>> that do run, for example the HD Playback, performs at
>> 100MB/sec on Solaris 10 and 74 MB/sec on OpenSolaris.
>
> Is this when using Samba?  If not, there are performance discussion
> threads in the cifs-discuss archives.
>
> Alan
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: Jay Seaman - GE Enterprise  
> Architect
> To: open-storage-interest at Sun.COM
> Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 7:12 AM
> Subject: CIFS performance - Solaris 10 and OpenSolaris
>
>
> There may be a better place to post this, but I'm not sure where :)
>
>
> I've started to do some performance testing for a customer project  
> that wants to use X4540 servers for a Windows file store project.  
> The initial question had to do with what kind of trade-offs did one  
> make for performance vs capacity if you used various zpool  
> configurations. Since Windows clients were the initial target, I  
> chose the Intel NAS Performance Toolkit as my test suite.
>
>
> I just today started the OpenSolaris testing and seem to have hit 2  
> snags.
>
>
> 1) I thought the point of the "integrated SMB stack" in OpenSolaris  
> was that it was kernel based and faster than the Samba offering in  
> Solaris 10? When I connect my network share from the Windows client,  
> it reports it is connected to "Samba 3.0.28". Confusing....
>
>
> 2) Performance is slower with OpenSolaris than Solaris 10. Slow  
> enough that the test suite won't complete. The tests that do run,  
> for example the HD Playback, performs at 100MB/sec on Solaris 10 and  
> 74 MB/sec on OpenSolaris.
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> Jay
>
>
> The greatest lesson in life is to realize that even fools are right  
> sometimes.
>
>
> Jay Seaman: Systems Engineer at Sun Microsystems
> 281 Tresser Boulevard, 2 Stamford Plaza 12th floor - Stamford, CT  
> 06901
> Contact | jay.seaman at sun.com | 877-718-3263 | aim - jayseaman4sun

The greatest lesson in life is to realize that even fools are right  
sometimes.

Jay Seaman: Systems Engineer at Sun Microsystems
281 Tresser Boulevard, 2 Stamford Plaza 12th floor - Stamford, CT 06901
Contact | jay.seaman at sun.com | 877-718-3263 | aim - jayseaman4sun

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/cifs-discuss/attachments/20090326/836e5649/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Picture 32.png
Type: image/png
Size: 12819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/cifs-discuss/attachments/20090326/836e5649/attachment.png>