Anomalously slow file transfers from Vista

13 views
Skip to first unread message

Tom Allen

unread,
Mar 2, 2007, 7:58:23 AM3/2/07
to
Folks,

I have a network of one Vista PC, one XP PC, a Buffalo NAS and a
E'net-switch/router.
Everything works in that all the shares are visible from both PCs and all
required access is available.

The problem is the anomalously slow transfers when pushing files from the
Vista PC to the XP PC and to the NAS.

The Vista PC can pull files from the other two at good speeds, around 6
MEGABytes/second , but the speed when PUSHING to the other two drops to
anything from 50 KILOBytes/second to 500 KILOBytes/second. The flashing light
on the router show a very 'pulsed' pattern of activity during these push
operations, longer pauses than data bursts.

The XP PC can push files to and pull files from the other two at good
speeds, around 4 MEGABytes/second (calculated) and upwards.

To copy any heavy files from the Vista PC to the Buffalo it is quicker for
me to pull the file to the XP PC and then copy it to the Buffalo from there.

I have tweaked various settings on the integrated E'net controller on the
Vista PC, switched out IP V6 and QOS, restarted the router etc. but to no
avail. Does anyone have advice on where to tickle my setup to improve the
speed for push copying from the Vista machine ?

The Vista PC is new and replaced an old W98 PC which copied at high speed,
both push and pull.

Del Dimension 8250 XP SP2. Dell Dimension 9200 Vista Home Premium - Intel
6600 Dual core 2.4 GHz, 4GB RAM. Netgear DG834 router. Cable network with
structured Cat5e UTP.


Regards
Tom Allen

Rob O.

unread,
Mar 2, 2007, 11:23:25 AM3/2/07
to
I have nothing more to add other than mentioning I have experienced extremley
slow transfer speeds when transfering from my XP Home machine to My Vista
Ultimate machine (originating the pull from Vista). In fact, on files larger
than 1MB, I get an error message saying it was unable to copy the file and I
can either "cancel" or "try again". Every time without fail the large file
copies to the Vista destination within seconds after hitting "try again".
Strange!

Rob O.

Tom Allen

unread,
Mar 3, 2007, 11:16:03 AM3/3/07
to
Seems this is Windows Explorer related as Acronis True Image can backup a
folder to the NAS in less than twenty seconds whereas a drag and drop copy of
the same folder within Windows Explorer takes twenty minutes.

I've tried setting TCP 'autotuning' to disabled but that had no effect.

Jeffrey S. Sparks

unread,
Mar 7, 2007, 11:33:24 AM3/7/07
to
I believe this is because Vista is using an updated version of SMB (the
protocol windows uses to transfer files via network). My guess is, it is
trying to use v2 and times out and has to go back to v1. This is just a
guess though. I was told at a launch event by a microsoft rep about vista
and the next generation of servers being upgraded to SMB v2 (although I
hadn't noticed any speed problems with Vista yet) and that it would allow
faster transfers and a variety of other things. Would be interesting to
hear someone from Microsoft about this though.

Jeff


"Tom Allen" <TomA...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:842B1BEF-47FF-4A74...@microsoft.com...

boe

unread,
Mar 7, 2007, 11:55:10 AM3/7/07
to
Did your rep say anything about a patch for our current 2003 servers to
support SMB v2?

Thanks

"Jeffrey S. Sparks" <jssp...@spam.bccinfo.com> wrote in message
news:18D0E429-5B23-4C7C...@microsoft.com...

Jeffrey S. Sparks

unread,
Mar 7, 2007, 12:15:50 PM3/7/07
to
He didn't know, he just announced it to everyone at a "Across America"
launch event.

Jeff

"boe" <bo...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eSxWhlNY...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

boe

unread,
Mar 7, 2007, 12:46:20 PM3/7/07
to
Thanks for the info.

"Jeffrey S. Sparks" <jssp...@spam.bccinfo.com> wrote in message

news:72C7D378-AD24-47FB...@microsoft.com...

Jeffrey S. Sparks

unread,
Mar 7, 2007, 1:10:56 PM3/7/07
to
No problem, if you happen to hear anything about this let me know. I am
going to try do some research on SMB v2 when i have the time to see what all
is being upgraded. I do remember him mentioning that when Microsoft created
SMB v1 it was designed for smaller files because they didn't have the larger
files we now have today. If I find anything I will post it here.

Jeff


"boe" <bo...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:%23HNOHCO...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

Jeffrey S. Sparks

unread,
Mar 7, 2007, 1:18:25 PM3/7/07
to
I found this online and thought you might find it interesting:

Server Message Block 2.0
Server Message Block (SMB), also known as the Common Internet File System
(CIFS), is the file sharing protocol used by default on Windows-based
computers. Windows includes an SMB client (the Client for Microsoft Windows
component installed through the properties of a network connection) and an
SMB server (the File and Printer Sharing for Microsoft Windows component
installed through the properties of a network connection). SMB in versions
of Windows prior to Windows Server "Longhorn" and Windows Vista, known as
SMB 1.0, was originally designed 15 years ago for early Windows-based
network operating systems such as Microsoft LAN Manager and Windows for
Workgroups and carries with it the limitations of its initial design.

SMB in Windows Server "Longhorn" and Windows Vista also supports SMB 2.0; a
new version of SMB that has been redesigned for today's networking
environments and the needs of the next generation of file servers. SMB 2.0
has the following enhancements:

. Supports sending multiple SMB commands within the same packet. This
reduces the number of packets sent between an SMB client and server, a
common complaint against SMB 1.0.

. Supports much larger buffer sizes compared to SMB 1.0.

. Increases the restrictive constants within the protocol design to allow
for scalability. Examples include an increase in the number of concurrent
open file handles on the server and the number of file shares that a server
can have.

. Supports durable handles that can withstand short interruptions in network
availability.

. Supports symbolic links.


Computers running Windows Server "Longhorn" or Windows Vista support both
SMB 1.0 and SMB 2.0. The version of SMB that is used for file sharing
operations is determined during the SMB session negotiation. The following
table shows which version of SMB that is used for various combinations of
client and server computers.

Client Server Version of SMB used
Windows Server "Longhorn" or Windows Vista -> Windows Server "Longhorn" or
Windows Vista
SMB 2.0

Windows Server "Longhorn" or Windows Vista -> Windows XP, Windows Server
2003, or Windows 2000
SMB 1.0

Windows XP, Windows Server 2003, or Windows 2000 -> Windows Server
"Longhorn" or Windows Vista
SMB 1.0

Windows XP, Windows Server 2003, or Windows 2000 -> Windows XP, Windows
Server 2003, or Windows 2000
SMB 1.0

Hope this helps...

Jeff

"boe" <bo...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:%23HNOHCO...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

Tom Allen

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 8:31:02 AM3/8/07
to
Thanks both of you for the responses and information,

In my innocence I would have assumed that an 'SMB session' would be one copy
function and thus only one negotiation would take place. There are very many
pauses in the 'Vista pushing' transfers I see, shown by the flashing lights
on the switch/router and by network activity as displayed by Task Manager.
Other transfers appear as continuous flickering.

Does the table apply to peers in a private home network and if so how does
the difference between push and pull come about ? Is the 'client' the
originator, the pusher or the puller ? Or is my setup operating at a dumber
level as Jeffrey's theory of 'timeouts' might suggest ?

I have yet to find anything to tweak to fix the problem.

Regards and thanks again
Tom

Tom Allen

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 9:01:31 AM3/9/07
to
The culprit has been found - and guess what - a third party firewall, McAfee's.

I had seen this mooted in relation to access problems but not to speed of
transfers but I wanted to get rid of the Dell pre-installed McAfee 'Security
Center' anyway. I had already switched off the firewall but un-install made
the difference, all transfers are now at good speed.

I'm still trying to stomp the remaining McAfee items into the ground,
Privacy Service won't uninstall and I had to stop and disable several other
McAfee services to get that far. I'm now relying on a One Care trial at the
moment but I have other defences - we'll see.

Tom

Moudmen

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 11:36:23 PM3/9/07
to
The problem doesn't only seem to exist between a Vista and an XP, it also exists between 2 Vista pcs, i tried it to see if the problem was from my XP or from my Vista, but unfortunately, the problem persists, there should be some update fix to this problem very soon i hope. I think moving hard disks from pc to pc might even be faster then copy on network :P.
If anybody finds a solution to this problem, please send me an email : mou...@hotmail.com .
Thank You.

EggHeadCafe.com - .NET Developer Portal of Choice
http://www.eggheadcafe.com

Moudmen

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 11:39:28 PM3/9/07
to

davesid

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 12:54:36 AM3/13/07
to
There seem to be hundreds of problems like this posted in various newgroups
and forums over the internet.I have the same problem sharing over a LAN is
very slow it seems to take for ever to calculate the time needed before
doing anything,then the transfer itself is very slow.I have the PC set to
dual boot into xp and that transfers fine so it is not a hardware problem

patrickseiflow

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 7:18:33 PM3/13/07
to
I had the same problem. Drove me nuts. However, I found some info provided by Tarique Naseem from another forum on Remote Differential Compression. Turned this off and that seemed to solve the problem! To do this go to Control Panel / Add Remove Programs / Turn off Windows features -> Untick Remote Differential Compression. In my case the computer now responds to network commands instantly. I now do not want to throw Vista into the bin!!

jeolmeun

unread,
Mar 18, 2007, 11:26:03 PM3/18/07
to
I turned off or disabled Offline Files and I was able to move and
rename file sharing files normally. I found this from another
newsgroup post and I think they said some OEMs turn this on or enable
it while an installation of Vista OEM would have Offline Files
disabled.

On Mar 2, 8:58 am, Tom Allen <TomAl...@discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I have a network of oneVistaPC, one XP PC, a Buffalo NAS and a


> E'net-switch/router.
> Everything works in that all the shares are visible from both PCs and all
> required access is available.
>

> The problem is the anomalouslyslowtransfers when pushing files from theVistaPC to the XP PC and to the NAS.
>
> TheVistaPC can pull files from the other two at good speeds, around 6


> MEGABytes/second , but the speed when PUSHING to the other two drops to
> anything from 50 KILOBytes/second to 500 KILOBytes/second. The flashing light
> on the router show a very 'pulsed' pattern of activity during these push
> operations, longer pauses than data bursts.
>
> The XP PC can push files to and pull files from the other two at good
> speeds, around 4 MEGABytes/second (calculated) and upwards.
>

> To copy any heavy files from theVistaPC to the Buffalo it is quicker for
> me to pull thefileto the XP PC and then copy it to the Buffalo from there.
>
> I have tweaked various settings on the integrated E'net controller on theVistaPC, switched out IP V6 and QOS, restarted the router etc. but to no


> avail. Does anyone have advice on where to tickle my setup to improve the
> speed for push copying from theVistamachine ?
>

> TheVistaPC is new and replaced an old W98 PC which copied at high speed,
> both push and pull.
>
> Del Dimension 8250 XP SP2. Dell Dimension 9200VistaHome Premium - Intel

Gary VanderMolen

unread,
Mar 19, 2007, 4:23:06 PM3/19/07
to
Where do I disable Offline Files?
Are you saying that doing so will speed up file transfer?

Gary VanderMolen

"jeolmeun" <jeol...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1174274763.0...@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...

Simon Wilkinson

unread,
Mar 20, 2007, 1:00:02 PM3/20/07
to

Tom - thanks for the info about McAfee, this was exactly the issue with
my new Dell/Vista computer too. For anyone else out there who has this
issue and would prefer not to have to uninstall McAfee, I discovered
that if I went into:

Computer & Files (click on Configure) > Advanced...

And then unchecked "Scan network drives", that this completely resolved
my issue of slow saving of individual network files. I'm using Visual
Studio 2005, and it was taking about 30 seconds to save each file, even
if a single character had been changed, but since changing that setting,
the saving is now instantaneous.

Hope this helps someone.


--
Simon Wilkinson

Tony Scott

unread,
Mar 20, 2007, 3:48:49 PM3/20/07
to
Simon,
Thank you for this one! It was driving me nuts!
Dell evidently have a setup problem which they should resolve, I thik!
Tony
"Simon Wilkinson" <Simon.Wilki...@no-mx.forums.net> wrote in message
news:Simon.Wilki...@no-mx.forums.net...
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages