jwcolby
jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com
Sun Mar 18 11:37:15 CDT 2012
Jim, I am reading through that thread as it seems somewhat helpful. John W. Colby Colby Consulting Reality is what refuses to go away when you do not believe in it On 3/18/2012 12:21 PM, Jim Lawrence wrote: > Hi John: > > I just dug this out of the link you sent. There are three posts being > combined but I think thye make it clear the solution they found: > > " The problem seems to be that the one or both servers are auto negotiating > proper GB speed. The way large data is handled between the two platforms > may have also changed somewhat and cards drivers are not setting proper > spped. Focus on the network cards in each server. Go to the Network card > properties of the card and select the configure button. Select the Advanced > TAB and scroll through the options and look for LINK SPEED and DUPLEX, > select Auto-negotiate 1000BPS. There may also be a choice auto-negotiate > without the 1000BPS - this won't or may not work and that is the problem. > Once we make this change we see the server transfer speed run properly. > > This fixed it for me but you said you already tried that. Try going into > the network adapter driver properties and DISABLE "TCP Connection Offload > (IPv4)". This is generally listed on the advanced tab of the network > adapter. > > I have a fix that worked which worked perfectly. I have an HP ML 350 G6 > server that was newly installed today and experience the same problem. I > noticed that the HP software was not installed as I would have expected on > older servers/oses. I downloaded the latest PSP from the HP drivers and > downloads, installed it as a proliant server should and voila - the NIC and > network worked exactly as it should. > Before: > Win 2003 SBS server to Win 2008 Enterprise w SP2 32bit -- > was about 2 minutes for a 22MB folder > After: > Now it is literally 1 second !!! > No tweaking needed - just installed and configured the HP Proliant software > to SPEC !!" > > How this solves your problem. > Jim > > -----Original Message----- > From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com > [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of jwcolby > Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 5:22 AM > To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving > Subject: Re: [AccessD] OT: Network speeds > > Yep. There is a switch at either end (behind the servers) and a switch in > the middle. But is the a > switch the issue at all? I am reading a ton of "Windows 2008 R2 to anything > transfer speed sucks" > stuff out on Google. > > For example: > > http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/windowsserver2008r2general/ > thread/2e14aa58-cb9b-462c-8a9e-7b10be2de3cb/ > > The servers at both end are Windows 2008 R2. It looks like my work is cut > out for me. > > John W. Colby > Colby Consulting > > Reality is what refuses to go away > when you do not believe in it > > On 3/17/2012 11:40 PM, Stuart McLachlan wrote: >> There are all sorts of possibilities there. What sort of rates do you get: >> >> 1. Through Switch 1 alone between SQL Server (computer) Win 2008 x64 and > Unraid file >> server (computer) >> >> 2. Through Switches 1 and 2 between SQL Server (computer) Win 2008 x64 and > Living room >> public PC (computer) >> >> 3. Through Switches 1 and 2 between Unraid file server (computer) and > Living room public >> PC (computer) >> >> 4. Through Switches 2 and 3 between Living room public PC (computer) and > VM Server (computer) Win 2008 X46 >> >> 5. 4. Through Switches 2 and 3 between Living room public PC (computer) > and Dev >> workstation laptop (computer) >> >> 6. Through Switches 1,2 and 3 between Unraid file server (computer) and > VM Server >> (computer) Win 2008 X46 >> >> 7. Through Switches 1,2 and 3 between Unraid file server (computer) and > Dev workstation >> laptop (computer) >> >> 7. Through Switches 1,2 and 3 between SQL Server (computer) Win 2008 x64 > and Dev >> workstation laptop (computer) >> >> (I think that covers all the combinations!) >> >> An analysis of those results should tell you where the bottleneck is. >> >