In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, COLLOT Jean-Yves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Excuse me, but I don't agree. I just ran Ben's "ruby" bench, which is > creating that 10000 Kb file, and I can see the very, very slow = > behaviour: it takes more than 36 seconds to run the bench > (compared to 2.35 seconds = for running a simple COPY).
My error from reading too early in the morning here. I missed the "Kb", and used it as "bytes" even though I also typed "Kb" The undesired behavior starts somewhere above 65535 bytes, not Kb. And it can be reproduced with a Windows NT 4.0 client on SAMBA 2.0.6. I have not tested it on anything earlier. It appears that there are two issues that affect the performance, and my guess is that the protocol negotiation is the main one. Fixing that will probably require porting a newer version of SAMBA. There are other consequences to RMS, and for the "magic" translation of VFC files to text files for this out-of-order translation that I want to look at also, as one of my goals is get the "notepad" problem on VMS fixed, even if it can not be fixed on UNIX. On VMS we have an advantage as we can tell if the file originally created on VMS is a text file, and what it's organization is. It is no problem setting up a SAMBA to serve any type of text file to a PC client as a stream-CRLF or a stream-LF regardless of it's original organization. It is handling the modify in place where the problems come in. So I think for the big problem, an updated port is needed, and for the second one, moving to a VFS loaded file system instead of wrappers for the file system calls. A VFS based system can bypass the CRTL completely to get the best speed. And by having one VFS for ODS-2 and one for ODS-5, it saves overhead on trying to support Pathworks name mangling. I also may be able to move the wild card matching into the VFS as an enhancement. I think it would speed up both the VMS and UNIX performance, especially the VMS performance. Especially with large directories. I pulled down the SAMBA4 kits last night with my barely functional rsync client. It looks like the only way to build it on VMS will initially require GNV and PERL. I do not know if I will get to trying that before next week. Regards, -John [EMAIL PROTECTED] Personal Opinion Only PLEASE READ THIS IMPORTANT ETIQUETTE MESSAGE BEFORE POSTING: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
