Re: Windows XP RAID 5
- From: Odie <odie_ferrous_at@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 19:35:44 +0100
Simon Finnigan wrote:
"Alex Fraser" <me@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:v9udndrzArTA4eHZRVnytQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Palindr?me" <me9@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:127opihoei00225@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[snip]
Examine the throughput on your 100 meg nic. I doubt that it is maxed out,
so putting in a 1000 meg link isn't going to achieve anything.
Windows file sharing seems incapable of saturating 100Mbit/s Ethernet, but
that doesn't mean it wouldn't be faster with 1Gbit/s Ethernet.
Pretty much what I was expecting. While it won't saturate the connection,
giving it a pipe 10 imes bigger to move the data across has got to improve
the speed somewhat :-)
In reality, don't expect more than a two- to three-times performance
increase at best.
Odie
--
Retrodata
www.retrodata.co.uk
Globally Local Data Recovery Experts
.
- References:
- Windows XP RAID 5
- From: Simon Finnigan
- Re: Windows XP RAID 5
- From: Palindr☻me
- Re: Windows XP RAID 5
- From: Alex Fraser
- Re: Windows XP RAID 5
- From: Simon Finnigan
- Windows XP RAID 5
- Prev by Date: Re: Windows XP RAID 5
- Next by Date: Re: Windows XP RAID 5
- Previous by thread: Re: Windows XP RAID 5
- Next by thread: Re: Windows XP RAID 5
- Index(es):