[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: SMB vs AFP performance

Subject: Re: SMB vs AFP performance
From: "Gary W. Zuker" <email@hidden>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 16:36:25 -0600
Delivered-to: email@hidden
Delivered-to: email@hidden
Domainkey-signature: s=main; d=mail.utexas.edu; c=nofws; q=dns; h=X-IronPort-MID:Received:Received:Received: Mime-Version:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References:Date: To:From:Subject:Content-Type; b=HQKTZKlDzbuCLf5Ux8Jd/MaN6RzKIe7f/Dh2qEFbgm5LKqCeHrRdj JYYMuO8HykEl+gfZZU8CPirDloATU+M48oa876eBHz3NKwJH2oZ8A 2UNo1qyNOYd33DEjTZqLECFdzeSOpJ/uIlfnqt/ncUPrNLRseZ1Js fLhuUp19u/PE=;

One of the things I found was that copying a large amount of data from the server volume to the Mac was significantly faster using SMB than using AFP. For a 500MB folder with 5 big files, AFP was getting around 36 Mbps, whereas SMB was getting around 50 Mbps.

--- I found just the opposite. I just did a quick unscientific experiment. On my desktop mac (10.4.11 late G5 tower, gigabit ethernet) I mounted the same server volume twice. The AFP mount was specified as "afp://servername" and the SMB mount as "SMB:// servername". Then I did a finder drag of a 1GB file to each server volume. The server is the same , just different protocols (dual G4 Xserve, 10.4.11 on gigabit ether with an Xraid for the share).

The transfer times for AFP were just slightly, though consistently, faster. 21 seconds for AFP and 25 seconds for SMB , for a 1GB audio file.

2. Are there any disadvantages in Macs using SMB rather than AFP to access the server?
For general usage, no. The SMB client is supposed to provide indistinguishable functionality to the AFP client. Off the top of my head, I can't think of a case where you would run into problems.

--- I would beg to differ here. As above, I open up two finder windows (an AFP mount, and an SMB mount of the same server). The collection of files I examine are on a group-use server, and they are created by a mixed bag of Windows XP and various OSX clients. When looking via the SMB mount I see a significant number of Word documents with incorrect icons, but which appear fine on the AFP mount. Most of the photoshop files that have nice thumbnail previews as their icon on AFP have only generic icons on the SMB mount.

 To end users,   these icon and document-type issues make a difference.
--
__________________________________
   Gary W. Zuker
   Senior Systems Analyst
   Department of Psychology
   University of Texas at Austin
__________________________________
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Macos-x-server mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/macos-x-server/email@hidden

This email sent to email@hidden

Follow-Ups:
- Re: SMB vs AFP performance
  - From: Dan Shoop <email@hidden>
- Re: SMB vs AFP performance
  - From: Karl Kuehn <email@hidden>
- Re: SMB vs AFP performance
  - From: James Peach <email@hidden>

References:
	>SMB vs AFP performance (From: David Morrison <email@hidden>)
	>Re: SMB vs AFP performance (From: James Peach <email@hidden>)

Prev by Date: Re: ssh 'You don't exist, go away!' from daemonised scripts
Next by Date: Re: Using 3rd Party SAS Drives in Current Xserves
Previous by thread: Re: SMB vs AFP performance
Next by thread: Re: SMB vs AFP performance
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Home