<Unfortuantly the only options for a Mac these days are Appletalk or Samba,
<NFS doesn't seem to be available. I could FTP files, but that's more of a
<pain that long Xfer times.
There is no IP?
The DEC appletalk stack works but it's an additional load, not fast and
doesn't route (ATK encapsulated does route).
<In this case the only traffic on the network was between the Mac and the
<VMS box. Which is why I was so surprised that the performance was _that_
<bad. If I'd have had a bunch of other systems on the network talking at
<that time I'd have not been suprised, but the only other system up was my
<firewall.
the firewall may be interacting. Those numbers are on a par with old MVIIs
with DEQNAs and MV2000s (ca1988).
Allison
<Part of my team at the lab where I worked at the rocket ranch was once
<tasked to quantify this and the first question you must ask is "Is there an
<DEC hardware in the building, connected or otherwise?" What was determine
This is humor, right?
Allison
I just tried FTPing a 20MB file to the VMS box from the Mac. I got
615KB/sec, which works out to about 36.9MB/minute. So, I think it's safe
to say that both AppleTalk and Samba performance under VMS suck! Though I
guess I should look into if any tuning of AppleTalk performance is possible
since it's not dependant on TCP/IP.
Glad the FTP performance is that good since I'm wanting to back data files
on the Mac up to the VMS box via Retrospect which allows backup via FTP.
Zane
| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Adminstrator |
| healyzh(a)aracnet.com (primary) | Linux Enthusiast |
| healyzh(a)holonet.net (alternate) | Classic Computer Collector |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------+
| Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
| and Zane's Computer Museum. |
| http://www.aracnet.com/~healyzh/ |
Part of my team at the lab where I worked at the rocket ranch was once
tasked to quantify this and the first question you must ask is "Is there any
DEC hardware in the building, connected or otherwise?" What was determined
was that with DEC hardware present, even if not connected, not uncrated, not
powered on, it would impact network performance. The interest I had was in
that I was routing PCM voice comm's over the same net, and was critically
interested in how network loading would effect my throughput, hence, voice
quality due to effective packet losses thanks to delays. In the presence of
DEC equipment, the upper limit was 33 Kbytes per sec with a 10% net load,
i.e. 10% of the available bandwidth is transferred as actual raw data
packets. Raw data is data which is both input and output data, i.e. without
any additional routing or transfer-associated header, trailer, ecc, etc.
Making the DEC equipment happy apparently took more overhead than a PC-only
network, since that managed to transfer considerably more, close to 30
MB/min with large packets and considerably less with smaller packets.
Apparently, knowing that DEC protocols had to be dealt with caused a sharp
increase in overhead. The number of stations attempting to transmit have a
large influence on sustainable traffic load and the associated
acknowledgment traffic can be substantial, though it doesn't contribute much
to (net) throughput.
With five stations on my in-house LAN, all inactive other than the server
and the station to which the tape is attached during a backup on 10BaseT I
can happily feed an admittedly slow Exabyte 8200 which has a maximum
transfer bandwidth of 13.038 MB/min. Under 100 Base TX, it happily feeds an
Exabyte 8505 which seems to max out at just over 30 MB/min, with no apparent
effect on the rest of the traffic, i.e it does that even if I'm running two
backups at the same time. That same tape drive takes much longer than the
8200 on the 10BT because it is always working underflows, which means it has
to back up and retry the write once it has streamed past the end of its
data. My 8500 drives, capable of between 20 and 22 MB/min, fare about as
well as the 8500 on the 10BT, and are unaffected by the 100BTx. Hence, a
really small 10 BT seems to be able to handle between 10 and 20 MB/min with
no other traffic. If packets are small, especially with very small packets,
data<<overhead, so net throughput will be really small if you have a large
net using multilayered protocols with many stations active. Even a small
number of stations using small packets can burn much of your bandwidth
because they tend to transmit frequently.
My voice traffic with its short packets was VERY inefficient even though
there were no ack's and no error management of any kind over the LAN. IIRC,
Appletalk sends occasional traffic over an otherwise idle LAN. I don't know
whether it does this when there really is traffic.
The numbers you quote seem a mite low, but not embarassingly so. You are
configured as a single segment, are you not?
Dick
-----Original Message-----
From: Zane H. Healy <healyzh(a)aracnet.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Date: Sunday, November 14, 1999 1:03 PM
Subject: OT: Effective Speed of 10BaseT
>I'm wondering what the effective speed of 10Mbit Ethernet is. I've got a
>DEC 3000/300LX that just isn't giveing me the kind of Xfer rates I expect,
>and I'm wondering/suspecting there is a problem with my calculations.
>Using a pair of PDF's totalling 24.6MB as my test I'm getting 8.34MB/Min,
>yet I'd expect it to be closer to 72MB/Min.
>
>The machine on the other end is a G4/450 PowerMac with 100BaseT, plugged
>into a 10/100Mbit switch, the DEC3000 is plugged into a 10/100Mbit hub
>which in turn is connected to the switch.
>
>Of course part of this could be the 21064/125 processor, and part of it
>could be the fact I'm using Appletalk.
>
> Zane
>| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Adminstrator |
>| healyzh(a)aracnet.com (primary) | Linux Enthusiast |
>| healyzh(a)holonet.net (alternate) | Classic Computer Collector |
>+----------------------------------+----------------------------+
>| Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
>| and Zane's Computer Museum. |
>| http://www.aracnet.com/~healyzh/ |
In a message dated 11/14/99 7:20:51 PM Eastern Standard Time,
rhudson(a)ix.netcom.com writes:
> Anyone know if Comments in my program will slow it down?
>
> (Anybody want yet another startrek game?)
>
> ron
>
i dont think they will, but keep your variables to two characters or less. to
applesoft, AP variable is the same as APPLESOFT as a variable. you should
also put your subroutines near the beginning of the program which will save
execution time.
DB Young Team OS/2
--> this message printed on recycled disk space
view the computers of yesteryear at
http://members.aol.com/suprdave/classiccmp/museum.htm
(now accepting donations!)
<But are you running over 10baseT (or 10base2) all the way? Zane's system
<might take a fair performance hit because either the hub or the switch is
<buffering every packet and retransmitting it.
Or there is enough traffic on the net to have holdoffs and collisons which
will really slow things.
Allison
Check outghis article, it appears that somone recently patented the
idea of using a pivot date, such as 30, and having the computer
consider numbers below that pivot point as being in the year 20??, ie
as being from 2000 - 2029. and he's trying to force companies that
used that programming technique to fix their Y2K problems, to pay him
millions. 70% of companies supposedly use that concept.
http://www.startribune.com/viewers/qview/cgi/qview.cgi?template=tech_a&slug…
-Lawrence LeMay
So I pulled the Intecolor terminal out of the car...model 8001i. The fuse
is missing
but I'm wondering what the deal is: It's a square fuse holder. I've
always seen
round ones before. Are there standard fuse types that fit this holder and
how hard
will it be to find a new cover for it?
Thanks...
Anthony Clifton - Wirehead
