Bekijk de volledige versie : Is it just me or is the new firmware (10) slower
Hi,
I've done the upgrade to oleg's 1.9.2.7-10 while I was coming from 1.9.2.7-8
Al is running well and I do like the pre-shutdown features in order to keep the data integretiy. but. in -8 I was running a very stable and fast system (samba and vsftpd transfers) while in-10 the transfers aren't nearly as fast as in -8 and the speeds keeps bouncing a bit.
in -8 I had transfer speeds
samba: 3.0 - 3.3 megabyte/sec
vsftpd: 3.7 - 3.9 megabyte/sec, with spikes of 4mb+
in -10 I now have transfer speeds
samba: 2.0 - 2.2 megabyte/sec, but bounces back every 5 seconds for a second to 700-800 kilobyte/sec
vsftpd: 2.5 - 3.0 megabyte/sec, but bounces back every 5 seconds for a second to 700-800 kilobyte/sec
I haven't installed any other packages in -10 than I was running in -8 but the transfersspeeds really have gone down.
Does anyone else have the same or kinda same problem?
Or does the pre-shutdown also work in -8? might be an option to go back.
TIA
Or does the pre-shutdown also work in -8? might be an option to go back.
pre-shutdown is working just fine in 8, but you need to modify rc.unslung and some Sxx scripts to accept start|stop feature.
pre-shutdown is working just fine in 8, but you need to modify rc.unslung and some Sxx scripts to accept start|stop feature.
Thanks for the info.
I was aware of the adjustments in the rc.unslung file
I'm going to try this out and post the results.
A bit of speed loss in favour of stability doesn't matter, but the -8 was very stable. But I did have the whole 'shutdown-scenario' missing..
newbiefan
20-05-2008, 22:14
@raas
Same probs with olegs 10, samba is terrible slow, but I haven't gotten any hint why, no log entry or whatsoever - cpu is running at max. 80%. USB has sometimes troubles to detect hdd and is therefore booting without hdd (opt).
After wasting several hours with different samba configs (internal, external, hdd's, sticks) and playing around with different configs without any success, I gaved up and installed olegs 8 again.
Now everything is fine again, as before.......
If you have any info regarding this strange behaviour, I would be glad to hear from you.
hi,
speed is almost on par now with -8,
I actually followed wengi's updated tutorial,
but running samba without xinetd. down 3.5+mb/sec up 3.2mb/sec
only thing which is now remarkably slower is ftp (but I now use proftpd instead of vsftpd, because that's running of xinetd)
For the rest, very stable, at last... running 15 days now without a reboot.
every service works.. except hellanzb stopped working downloading.. but that's normal behaviour I had also in -8, so no change to that.
look at wengi's tutorial, and the one with the startup and shutdown scripts and you should be good.
newbiefan
21-05-2008, 21:51
so the only difference is running without xinetd. Have you tried with xinetd? Or is there a special reason why you avoid to use xinetd?
Ok, will give it a new try at the weekend, running without xinetd, hopefully it works...........
And just to be at the save side, I'll clear nvram and install everything again.
I've no idea what causes my router to slow down everything and samba is not useable as long as it is terrible slow. Funny is, that everything looks like running proper - maybe I'll connect my rs232 converter to have a closer look....
Anyway thanks........
I have currently a dual boot on my pc with windows xp and vista, both 64bit.
and I can't find any speed changes to be honest.
only on windows vista I have a terrible upload speed to both samba2 and the build in ftp server.
only 1.5mb/s
when I get in windows xp it's just 4mb/s again:confused:
I mean... samba has changed in vista wich makes slower uploads to older machines, but I have no idea why it's also on ftp with filezilla and some other programs...
newbiefan
22-05-2008, 08:29
@wpte
I banish any vista from every PC due to the fact, that vista's virus protection is worse as any virus which I know......I my opinion it's the same garbage as Asus downloadmaster - it simply doesn't work as expected or slows down anything. In my circle of friends, no vista is running, it has absolutely no advantages and causes to use most of cpu-power for just nothing. When you banish vista, you get a running OS. Therefore I use xp, why should I pay anything for a terrible slow os, running on a fast pc? Vista is just grap...
shinji257
09-06-2008, 01:41
@wpte
I banish any vista from every PC due to the fact, that vista's virus protection is worse as any virus which I know......I my opinion it's the same garbage as Asus downloadmaster - it simply doesn't work as expected or slows down anything. In my circle of friends, no vista is running, it has absolutely no advantages and causes to use most of cpu-power for just nothing. When you banish vista, you get a running OS. Therefore I use xp, why should I pay anything for a terrible slow os, running on a fast pc? Vista is just grap...
Umm... vista doesn't have any built-in virus protection. You must mean that crap that PC manufacturer's shove down our throat.
Anyways I have -10 running here just fine. I didn't do any actual download tests but I opted to use the built-in vsftpd rather than samba due to memory limitations. I am trying to make sure to keep a bit of an opening here but I did run transmission fine last night letting it download Openoffice as a test run. The swap worked as expected and the router did not crash. ;)
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 30164 28404 1760 0 5024 13012
Swap: 506008 2048 503960
Total: 536172 30452 505720
newbiefan
09-06-2008, 21:27
Umm... vista doesn't have any built-in virus protection. You must mean that crap that PC manufacturer's shove down our throat.
Well, now my samba works - seems like something was wrong with nvram......
Anyhow, you're right vista does'nt have a real virus protection. Maybe something is related to some crappy sw of third parties....
But in any case, vista is more as terrible - see:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/12/freeformdynamics_vista_downgrade/
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/246648/CNET_Windows_Vista_among_top_10_terrible_tech_prod ucts
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071014-consumer-protection-org-warns-resist-vista-back-to-the-future-with-xp.html
I go along with you, when we would say: it will be good enough sometimes in the future, maybe in 6 years?
But in any case: vista is terrible slow, where is my advantage when my os makes my brandnew pc running like a 500mhz Pentium with XP. I know, a lot of stuff is running while I wanna work with my PC, but I'm the user - I never asked for features which I can't see and I don't want. And why should I pay for a os running on a fast dualcore like an old man? Thats the reason, why I use on most of my machines Linux and XP.
No offense meant!
Have fun....
shinji257
10-06-2008, 04:53
Well, now my samba works - seems like something was wrong with nvram......
Anyhow, you're right vista does'nt have a real virus protection. Maybe something is related to some crappy sw of third parties....
But in any case, vista is more as terrible - see:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/12/freeformdynamics_vista_downgrade/
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/246648/CNET_Windows_Vista_among_top_10_terrible_tech_prod ucts
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071014-consumer-protection-org-warns-resist-vista-back-to-the-future-with-xp.html
I go along with you, when we would say: it will be good enough sometimes in the future, maybe in 6 years?
But in any case: vista is terrible slow, where is my advantage when my os makes my brandnew pc running like a 500mhz Pentium with XP. I know, a lot of stuff is running while I wanna work with my PC, but I'm the user - I never asked for features which I can't see and I don't want. And why should I pay for a os running on a fast dualcore like an old man? Thats the reason, why I use on most of my machines Linux and XP.
No offense meant!
Have fun....
None taken. I do the same thing. ;)
Hi,
ever thought of running w2k3 server?
the look and feel of it can be made exactly the same as in XP but it has more options, and some components of the are newer (like IIS) than in XP.
(you can get rid of the anoying startup/shutdown messages)
M$ never released a 'professional' version of w2k3, but with a little tweaking (audio acceleration, video acceleration, directX, themes, messenger etc.etc) it becomes as versatile as xp for a home user, but in my opinion even stabler as xp
have running a couple of machines like this, and if another machine just happens to be needed to be reinstalled, this would be my first choice.
take a look at the following link http://lx.divxstation.com/article.asp?aId=76&page=1