windows/linux ftp question... ws_ftp/proftpd

[Tim]

bruce:
>> i was able to get (once) a throughput of ~600-700KBs for a few of the files.
>> (i'm moving some ISO files) however, for the most part, i can only get up to
>> ~65KBs on a consistent basis...

Jay Cliburn:
> 65 KB/s is pretty darn good.  That's on the order of 500-550
> kilobits/sec -- about what you might expect for gigabit Ethernet.

Huh?!?  Only if you've got crap hardware.

Yes, 65 KB/s is around 520 Kb/s, but that's rather poor transfer speed.
The old coaxial ethernet was 10 Mb/s (1.25 MB/s) in non-duplex mode
(twice that in duplex).  Granted you didn't usually transfer data that
fast because it was data and handling that uses the bandwidth.  But the
current common ethernet speed of 100 Mb/s (12.5 MB/s) often gets a hell
of a lot faster than you're suggesting (again, twice that speed in
duplex).

Gigabit ethernet (1 Gb/s or 125 MB/s) should manage to get around the
top speed of your hard drive continuous transfer rate, and most should
manage at least 10 MB/s without any dramas (seems quite common for even
the fastest of UDMA IDE drives to get stuck at just 10 megs per second
due to how the interfaces get configured).  And should easily go faster
if you have your drives/drive interfaces set up right, likewise for all
hardware (not sharing IRQs between your NIC or HDD and things that don't
share nicely).

As Les mentioned, bad ethernet set ups can play havoc with transfer
speeds.  I've found Windows firewalls and anti-virus can be the root
cause of extremely slow transfers, particularly the anti-virus as it
examines all the data going through.  If you use anti-virus software,
Bruce, try changing some options to only scan files on demand, or not
scan everything over the network.

-- 
(Currently running FC4, occasionally trying FC5.)

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.