Leopard file sharing

[kaiserwilhelm]

Am I in the right forum? If not, please move this thread.
Installed 10.5.1 on brand new Mac Pro's with 10 gig of ram.
You would think they would fly. They do, except for sharing
between a smb server and a mac.
I can drag 500 mb from a Mac Server (10.3) to a Leopard
Mac pro and it takes like 20 seconds.
Do the same thing from a smb shared drive to Leopard
and you might as well go have lunch.
1. Any ideas?
2. If not, then anyone else considering installing 10.5.1
should be wary.
Yes, I did test 10.5.1 on an old G5 for a week. I almost think
this is a progressive issue. Sometimes during the day it
gets MUCH better...

 

[neotrog]

Re: Leopard file sharing

I think I have more questions than answers. Where is the SMB shared drive located? There's a gajillion variables in client to server file transfers. Loading, network topography, protocol, etc. AFP over TCP/IP is one of the cleanest and meanest ways to get data from one machine to another. SMB, when it's run from a Mac server is just as efficient in most cases. Macs like Jumbo packets that some machine's cards can't handle and they'll reduce the size, possibly a switch will try to re-pack&re-stack. A little more detail about the machines involved and how they attach to the network would help me know if I have a clue. In short, I haven't seen Leopard behave differently than Tiger on the networks but I am in very limited implementation right now.

 

[kaiserwilhelm]

Re: Leopard file sharing

Three machines involved.
A. MacPro running 10.5.1
B. MacServer 10.3.9 I think
C. Windows 2000 Server running quad processors, etc. Beefy little $30K box

Take a folder with 40 (15 meg) pdfs in it. Total of around 600 meg.
This sits on C
Drag from C to A OR B and go and get a sandwich.

Now, once on A or B, drag from A to B or B to A - Two minutes compared to twenty
SMB shares from A and B to C
Does that help?

 

[blackjack]

Re: Leopard file sharing

Check your IP address in your Server. If the IP address of your server example is 192.168.1.35, then you should change your IP Address on your two mac computers.

A. MacPro running 10.5.1 (192.168.1.36)
B. MacServer 10.3.9 I think (192.168.1.37)
C. Windows 2000 Server running quad processors, etc. Beefy little $30K box (192.168.1.35]

now, Connect to Server in the finder (MacPro) or Apple K. It should be fine now.

I think leopard 10.5 has a little problem on sharing but in 10.5.1 has less bugs now.

We have 1 Windows 2000 Server with 10 computer networks natively under Leopard System. That is our first problem when we install Leopard but now works fine.

 

[neotrog]

Re: Leopard file sharing

Hi Chris;

Sorry. Been away. Are you still having speed issues? The thing about the IP addresses is ??? You seem like a tech. freak so I would presume you have your network set up in a reasonable way. Even if the machines are on different subnets the speed should be good unless you are getting routed out to the internet and back in or the router that bridges the subnets is wicked pokey. You can run traceroute from the network utility to rule out that possibility. Perhaps run it from the Win2K box back at the mac. Protocols? When you connect to the AppleshareIP server you are using something like "afp://123.123.123.1" or perhaps you browse to it. Are you running SFM on the Win2K server or are you perhaps browsing and using the mac's smb/netbios support? I have an old, old, server running SFM and I get about 8MB per second from client to server with no load. It's the same regardless of the MacOS (even 9). I am running SFM on the Win box and therefor using the url afp://123.123.123.1 to connect to the Win server as well.

Are there other Macs or windows clients that move data to the Win2K box in question quickly? Perhaps the answer lies in their config.