How to speed up network share

[ell]

OK...so if I am drawing the picture of this setup correctly...you have 2x computers. They are connected to each other using a patch cable from NIC to NIC. Assuming the patch cable is CAT5e minimum..and properly put together...factory made? Yes, exactly right

One of the PCs has a USB cellular modem...which should be irrelevant of the two computers connecting together so we'll leave that alone. yup

You should not need a switch in between the computers...they're just doing a direct connection to each other. Part of the gigabit standard is auto MDI-X...so a crossover cable is not needed either...the NICs do it themselves, just a standard CAT5e patch cable is all you need.

Are the computers set on static LAN IP addresses? no, does it matter with only 2 pcs?
Is netbios over IP enabled in the advanced TCP/IP settings on each? no

Firewalls rules set on both for workgroup file 'n print sharing? I think so, I'll have to check it again
Any 3rd party software firewalls/security suites installed which is bloating things up? no, in fact the client pc has no antivirus at all since it does not go on the net.
Speaking of antivirus....set exclusions in the real time scanner on the host PC for the directory which is shared. good idea. And on the client PC...set exclusions on network drives/folders...including this folder it's reading on the "server".

What network cards? Realtek RTL8103EL Intels are best..Broadcoms OK, I don't like realtecs...but for only 2 computers it shouldn't matter much...it's not like you're trying to serve up files to dozens of clients.

Have tried turning on jumbo frames on each computers NIC? Try setting to 9,000.I will check on this! don't know if the cards have the option. thanks great info!

Thanks! I went over today and set the static ip's, enabled netbios and set jumbo frames to 9000 in both, worked great!

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

The point of the router isnt for the internt, its for a DHCP server. The benefit it adds, is if he goes away, and the client goes to add real internet to the mix, he probably will not know what to do, and blame him. Seen it happen. .

I've never seen a customer "blame" me.....or even a hint of pointing the finger, to reconfigure a network when changing ISPs. I'm consulted waaay ahead of time, schedule the transition with the ISP...go onsite for the changeover, all goes well.

"Servers" should be static...so clients can easily find them. Leaving a server "dynamic" is a poor setup IMO...ends up in relying on name resolution which is virtually non existent on an unmanaged network (by unmanaged...I mean, no active directory running DNS). Leaving things dynamic..in a week or a month when that server pulls a different IP address from the router...the second workstation (client) may not find it. Ends up in a phone call. Month after month...after month....til someone finally sets it up right on a static IP.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

Thanks! I went over today and set the static ip's, enabled netbios and set jumbo frames to 9000 in both, worked great!

Jumbo frames was probably the main factor....so many people never enable that on gigabit networks. You end up wasting (or rather..never utilizing) 60% of the bandwidth of gigabit.

Of course..not all switches support jumbo frames...usually cheaper SOHO grade ones.

 

[ell]

Jumbo frames was probably the main factor....so many people never enable that on gigabit networks. You end up wasting (or rather..never utilizing) 60% of the bandwidth of gigabit.

Of course..not all switches support jumbo frames...usually cheaper SOHO grade ones.

Well that was short-lived, I called them back today to follow-up and he said its slowed again. Weird, I think its the software prgm itself, I called support and all she could offer me was to disable UAC, I'll try that but I have my doubts.

 

[Knightsman]

I've never seen a customer "blame" me.....or even a hint of pointing the finger, to reconfigure a network when changing ISPs. I'm consulted waaay ahead of time, schedule the transition with the ISP...go onsite for the changeover, all goes well.

"Servers" should be static...so clients can easily find them. Leaving a server "dynamic" is a poor setup IMO...ends up in relying on name resolution which is virtually non existent on an unmanaged network (by unmanaged...I mean, no active directory running DNS). Leaving things dynamic..in a week or a month when that server pulls a different IP address from the router...the second workstation (client) may not find it. Ends up in a phone call. Month after month...after month....til someone finally sets it up right on a static IP.

So your saying that you have NEVER had a client talk bad about about a previous tech? Id be very suprised if thats true. I find a lot of people complain about someone, when in fact it was their fault at all, just a misunderstanding of the work performed. You cant say you never have, because with all of the customers we have had, and id imagine you have had quite a bit also, there are going to be some that have issues, and it sounds like this client might give this guy some issues, unless he makes it a failsafe.

Well that was short-lived, I called them back today to follow-up and he said its slowed again. Weird, I think its the software prgm itself, I called support and all she could offer me was to disable UAC, I'll try that but I have my doubts.

How much ram do these computers have? What program are they running thats causing this?

How much ram is being used when it is actually open?

Are both open at the same time of the slow saving/opening?

 

[ell]

So your saying that you have NEVER had a client talk bad about about a previous tech? Id be very suprised if thats true. I find a lot of people complain about someone, when in fact it was their fault at all, just a misunderstanding of the work performed. You cant say you never have, because with all of the customers we have had, and id imagine you have had quite a bit also, there are going to be some that have issues, and it sounds like this client might give this guy some issues, unless he makes it a failsafe.

How much ram do these computers have? What program are they running thats causing this? they each have 4 gb, they are running Inventory Traker

How much ram is being used when it is actually open? I didn't check, but systems seem plenty fast with it open

Are both open at the same time of the slow saving/opening?

The server has to have the program running for the client to access the files, and they both constantly access the same files, thats the reason he wanted a second workstation. He said it starts out fast but then by the end of the day it gets slow, but I haven't heard back yet if disabling UAC has helped at all.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

So your saying that you have NEVER had a client talk bad about about a previous tech? Id be very suprised if thats true. I find a lot of people complain about someone, when in fact it was their fault at all, just a misunderstanding of the work performed. You cant say you never have, because with all of the customers we have had, and id imagine you have had quite a bit also, there are going to be some that have issues, and it sounds like this client might give this guy some issues, unless he makes it a failsafe.

Sure I've heard customers complain that the prior IT person couldn't get things running right, had to get called a lot, etc etc. I find that irrelevant of me following "best practices" though. To me, leaving a "server" on dynamic IPs is not "best practice". Yes in this case it's just a 2 workstation peer to peer network, and the server isn't a true server...it's just a desktop acting as a server, but I would still follow the best practice of setting it up on a static IP, enabling netbios, and doing a setup that makes it as reliable as possible on the network. Doing what you need to do to make it reliable day in an day out trumps trying to treat it like a home network with the possibility of a network change in XXX amount of years down the road.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

Well that was short-lived, I called them back today to follow-up and he said its slowed again. Weird, I think its the software prgm itself, I called support and all she could offer me was to disable UAC, I'll try that but I have my doubts.

I don't see UAC causing a slowdown.
Find out what this program uses for a back end...a database engine, etc.

If there's a database engine on the server..or even if not, you may want to go flip that switch that Windows desktop has to make it run more like a server..and focus more resources on background services instead of foreground apps. Right click My Computer, go to Properties, Advanced tab, Settings button in the Performance box, click the next Advanced tab..and flip the radio button choice to Background Services.

 

[FremontPC]

"He said it starts out fast but then by the end of the day it gets slow..."

No matter whether accessing the folder via the app or via Explorer?

Restart the one system, then the other. Any change?

Does Event Viewer\Custom Views\Administrative Events give any clue?

How are you connecting to the share (Network and Sharing Center, mapping the share as a drive, etc)?

 

[ell]

"He said it starts out fast but then by the end of the day it gets slow..."

No matter whether accessing the folder via the app or via Explorer? I haven't tried that

Restart the one system, then the other. Any change? nope

Does Event Viewer\Custom Views\Administrative Events give any clue? nothing

How are you connecting to the share (Network and Sharing Center, mapping the share as a drive, etc)?

network share, the program has two separate installers, one for the server and one for the client.

 

[angry_geek]

There is an odd registry setting in windows 7 that has to do with the number of network connections to the system. I had this issue a while back, and for the life of me can't remember the steps to fix it. What I do remember is the problem was gone once I did the change. Perhaps, search for windows 7 as file server. I'll see if I can find my notes.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

There is an odd registry setting in windows 7 that has to do with the number of network connections to the system. I had this issue a while back, and for the life of me can't remember the steps to fix it. What I do remember is the problem was gone once I did the change. Perhaps, search for windows 7 as file server. I'll see if I can find my notes.

"net config server" at command prompt.
With XP was set at 10, with Win7 it's 20. For SMB shares. When it hits the limit though, the next attempt will receive a flat out error that the server cannot take any more connections.

 

[angry_geek]

"net config server" at command prompt.
With XP was set at 10, with Win7 it's 20. For SMB shares. When it hits the limit though, the next attempt will receive a flat out error that the server cannot take any more connections.

That's one of them, but there was something else. I'm just having trouble remembering what it was.

 

[Knightsman]

Sure I've heard customers complain that the prior IT person couldn't get things running right, had to get called a lot, etc etc. I find that irrelevant of me following "best practices" though. To me, leaving a "server" on dynamic IPs is not "best practice". Yes in this case it's just a 2 workstation peer to peer network, and the server isn't a true server...it's just a desktop acting as a server, but I would still follow the best practice of setting it up on a static IP, enabling netbios, and doing a setup that makes it as reliable as possible on the network. Doing what you need to do to make it reliable day in an day out trumps trying to treat it like a home network with the possibility of a network change in XXX amount of years down the road.

How is this way, over what I explained "best practice". And I never said I wouldnt set it as a static IP address. however with two computers even dynamic wouldnt cause a slow down...

I dont understand why your saying its treated as a home network. Considering I dont do home networks, could you clarify how what I explained is a "home network" setup over it being a business network. Care to elaborate how the setup i explained would not work peferectly for a small business, SOHO or not?

I feel like your trying to make yourself right where both ways would work. I just simply explained my way would reduce the issues that clients cause. No doubt, the customers that have complained about previous techs, probably had no idea why they were calling back, just that it didnt work. Just like this guys client. he has now called him back a couple times, and this same client can go to another new tech and complain and say he didnt know what he was doing, had to keep calling him back. Even know we know this simply isnt true, it doesnt stop the client from bad mouthing him now, or down the road.

See my point?

 

[Knightsman]

The server has to have the program running for the client to access the files, and they both constantly access the same files, thats the reason he wanted a second workstation. He said it starts out fast but then by the end of the day it gets slow, but I haven't heard back yet if disabling UAC has helped at all.

Gotta be something with the program or a service, backend system. Have you contacted the vendor of the software to see if its a common problem? Maybe they know a fix.

 

[angry_geek]

Aha! It was TCP auto-tuning and Remote Differential Compression. When I disabled these, the problem went away. Also check your anti-virus. If real time protection is enabled, it may be scanning every inbound and outbound file transfer.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

Aha! It was TCP auto-tuning and Remote Differential Compression. When I disabled these, the problem went away. .

Hmmm...that's an odd one. Should only come into play when traveling outside of a LAN, as the auto tuning should just kick in when dealing with latencies of shooting across broadband. My friend Philip from Speedguide.net has done a lot of articles and tweaks.
http://www.speedguide.net/articles/windows-7-vista-2008-tweaks-2574

 

[angry_geek]

Hmmm...that's an odd one. Should only come into play when traveling outside of a LAN, as the auto tuning should just kick in when dealing with latencies of shooting across broadband. My friend Philip from Speedguide.net has done a lot of articles and tweaks.
http://www.speedguide.net/articles/windows-7-vista-2008-tweaks-2574

I know it's odd. I installed a win 7 desktop for a client last year as a file server (don't get me started on desktops as servers urggh), and they were having the same problem. That's what fixed it.

 

[Knightsman]

I know it's odd. I installed a win 7 desktop for a client last year as a file server (don't get me started on desktops as servers urggh), and they were having the same problem. That's what fixed it.

I think thats the most frustrating part about what we do sometimes. We quickly dismiss ideas that dont make sense, and we try every logical option, waste so much time, and it ends up being something so simple.

 

[ell]

Gotta be something with the program or a service, backend system. Have you contacted the vendor of the software to see if its a common problem? Maybe they know a fix.

yes I have repeatedly, they say they will not supply updates or patches after 1 yr, he has to buy another year of support, pretty much worthless. He hasn't called me back, I think hes pretty much resigned to the fact we've done everything we can do.