A 100meg file copies over my 100mb LAN in 1minute, 11seconds.
When it was a 10mb LAN, it copied in 2minutes, 22seconds.
1. Shouldn't I have seen a better increase when I went from 10 to 100?
2. How fast should a 100meg file copy?
I still feel it's odd that I went from 10 to 100 and the speed was
exactly half. Makes me think I was 100 all along but only
half-duplex. My old hub was only a 10mb though so that shouldn't be
possible.
>I upgraded to a D-Link 100mb switch. It says all cards are 100mb and
>full duplex.
>
>A 100meg file copies over my 100mb LAN in 1minute, 11seconds.
>
>When it was a 10mb LAN, it copied in 2minutes, 22seconds.
>
>1. Shouldn't I have seen a better increase when I went from 10 to 100?
>2. How fast should a 100meg file copy?
>
Your 100 Mbps network
-----------------------------------
100 Mbps network can in theory do a maximum of 10 Megabytes per second
100 MBytes in 71 seconds = about 1.5 Megabytes per second
Your bottleneck here is most likely disk speed believe it or not.
Unless absolutely massive ram of >256 MB your systems will not cache a
100 MB file very well.
Your 10 Mbps network
----------------------------------
100 Mbytes in 142 seconds = about 0.7 Megabytes per second = 700
kB/sec = 7 Mbps which is pretty efficient for that network
A good general test is if copying a file across your network happens
at the same speed as if you were copying it locally from one directory
to another. If so, your bottleneck is disk throughput.