4 ms·
On my home LAN connected with 10gbps fiber between MacBook Pro and server, 10 feet away, I get about 1.5gbps vs the non-network speed of the disks of ~50 gbps.
by kridsdale1 2y ago
On my home LAN connected with 10gbps fiber between MacBook Pro and server, 10 feet away, I get about 1.5gbps vs the non-network speed of the disks of ~50 gbps. (Bits, not bytes)
I worked this out to the macOS SMB implementation really sucking. I set up a NFS driver and it got about twice as fast but it’s annoying to mount and use, and still far from the disk’s capabilities.
I’ve mostly resorted to abandoning the network (after large expense) and using Thunderbolt and physical transport of the drives.
- greenavocado 2y agoIs NFS out of the question?
- kridsdale1 2y agoI have set it up but it’s not easy to get drivers working on a Mac.
- insaneirish 2y agoWhat particular drivers are you referring to? NFS is natively supported in MacOS...
- olavgg 2y agoThat is true, though the implementation is weird. I mount my nfs shares like this: sudo mount -t nfs -o nolocks -o resvport 192.168.1.1:/tank/data /mnt/data -o nolocks Disables file locking on the mounted share. Useful if the NFS server or client does not support locking, or if there are issues with lock daemons. On macOS, this is often necessary because lockd can be flaky. -o resvport Tells the NFS client to use a reserved port (<1024) for the connection. Some NFS servers (like some Linux configurations or *BSDs with stricter security) only accept requests from clients using reserved ports (for authentication purposes).
- dundarious 2y agoSMB/CIFS is an incredibly chatty, synchronous protocol. There are/were massive products built around mitigating and working around this when trying to use it over high latency satellite links (US military did/does this).