Results 1 to 17 of 17
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    63

    S4S - Network speed, New Server, Horrible speed?

    EDIT: I don't mean to say "horrible speed", it's actually good speed. The "Horrible Speed" was accidently..could a mod fix that?

    Here's a test file:
    http://72.232.246.242/test.exe

    My speed: 900KB/s
    My ISP: Verizon 15Mbps FIOS

    How can this be? It's on a 100Mbps port??? I was expecting atleast 1.5MB/s NOT 900KB/s

    Why can't I get 1.5MB/s atleast? My FIOS is able to download 2MB/s from Microsoft and other servers

    BTW, They were very fast and coursteous (sp?) at getting my other issue fixed with the network so I give them a thumbs up at that.
    Last edited by BankRobber; 11-29-2006 at 04:45 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    3,080
    Because your standards are too high and you cannot expect to max out your FIOS connection all of the time.... MS uses akami which means you get the fastest downloads possible, your server is just direct to it.

    I got 1.5MB/sec from one datacenter and 3.5MB/sec from another which is not horrible for 100Mbps port on a single transfer. You can certainly contact them but it does not seem all THAT bad.
    John W, CISSP, C|EH
    MS Information Security and Assurance
    ITEagleEye.com - Server Administration and Security
    Yawig.com - Managed VPS and Dedicated Servers with VIP Service

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    63
    What do you get from mine? I get 900KB/s...it sounds a bit dissapointing. If I can get ATLEAST 1.2MB/s, I would be happy =(

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    3,080
    Those 2 above speeds were from that file.
    John W, CISSP, C|EH
    MS Information Security and Assurance
    ITEagleEye.com - Server Administration and Security
    Yawig.com - Managed VPS and Dedicated Servers with VIP Service

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    251
    It kind of depends on how far away you are from your server.

    If you are interested, try the speed tests here from servers that are located around the country.

    http://www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/

    I'm in Northern Virginia and only get 15mbps to New York and Washington DC. I only get 4.5mbps to Los Angeles as it is on the other side of the country and the download probably has to pass through a bunch of networks to get to me (with each hop potentially slowing things down).
    Kevin, The Walrus

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    207
    This is what I got from our datacenter in San Jose:

    --13:00:57-- http://72.232.246.242/test.exe
    => `test.exe'
    Connecting to 72.232.246.242:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: 278,927,592 [application/octet-stream]

    100%[====================================>] 278,927,592 1.28M/s ETA 00:00

    13:04:25 (1.28 MB/s) - `test.exe' saved [278927592/278927592]
    Dedicated Servers. Resellers Welcome.
    www.dediwebhost.com

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    63
    Ok. Can someone tell their speeds on THIS new file
    http://www.offtopichaven.com/test.exe

    This is from the Godaddy Servers

    Thanks!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    1,648
    The TCP Window size is not set high enough on Windows for you to yield better results; the biggest window I get from your server is 240,128 bytes which is producing a drastic decrease in performance with additional latency. You're going to need to tweak your server's TCP window buffers if you want better performance.

    From a box I have at ColoStore to your box (your server only allows a 240,128 byte window size):
    Code:
    --15:56:21--  http://72.232.246.242/test.exe
               => `test.exe'
    Connecting to 72.232.246.242:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: 278,927,592 (266M) [application/octet-stream]
    
    23% [=======>                             ] 66,059,376     1.61M/s    ETA 02:09
    
    --- 72.232.246.242 ping statistics ---
    11 packets transmitted, 11 received, 0% packet loss, time 9998ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 33.539/33.967/35.060/0.469 ms
    From that same box to my Linux server in databank (which negotiates to a 1,314,816 byte window size):
    Code:
    --15:57:09--  http://nemesis/100mb.bin
               => `100mb.bin'
    Resolving nemesis... 72.232.databank.ip
    Connecting to nemesis|72.232.databank.ip|:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: 104,857,600 (100M) [application/octet-stream]
    
    100%[====================================>] 104,857,600    9.12M/s    ETA 00:00
    
    15:57:21 (8.69 MB/s) - `100mb.bin' saved [104857600/104857600]  
    
    --- nemesis ping statistics ---
    11 packets transmitted, 11 received, 0% packet loss, time 9997ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 33.660/34.067/34.501/0.324 ms
    To show your server can really crank out 100mbit, from my server in LT's Databank DC to your server:
    Code:
     --16:00:25--  http://72.232.246.242/test.exe
               => `test.exe'
    Connecting to 72.232.246.242:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: 278,927,592 (266M) [application/octet-stream]
    
    100%[====================================>] 278,927,592   11.20M/s    ETA 00:00
    
    16:00:50 (10.53 MB/s) - `test.exe' saved [278927592/278927592] 
    
    --- 72.232.246.242 ping statistics ---
    11 packets transmitted, 11 received, 0% packet loss, time 9998ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.332/0.459/0.582/0.080 ms
    Last edited by spaethco; 11-29-2006 at 06:36 PM.
    Eric Spaeth
    Enterprise Network Engineer :: Hosting Hobbyist :: Master of Procrastination
    "The really cool thing about facts is they remain true regardless of who states them."

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    762
    Your speeds are fine, you shouldn't expect to max your connection out.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by spaethco
    The TCP Window size is not set high enough on Windows for you to yield better results; the biggest window I get from your server is 240,128 bytes which is producing a drastic decrease in performance with additional latency. You're going to need to tweak your server's TCP window buffers if you want better performance.

    From a box I have at ColoStore to your box (your server only allows a 240,128 byte window size):
    Code:
    --15:56:21--  http://72.232.246.242/test.exe
               => `test.exe'
    Connecting to 72.232.246.242:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: 278,927,592 (266M) [application/octet-stream]
    
    23% [=======>                             ] 66,059,376     1.61M/s    ETA 02:09
    
    --- 72.232.246.242 ping statistics ---
    11 packets transmitted, 11 received, 0% packet loss, time 9998ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 33.539/33.967/35.060/0.469 ms
    From that same box to my Linux server in databank (which negotiates to a 1,314,816 byte window size):
    Code:
    --15:57:09--  http://nemesis/100mb.bin
               => `100mb.bin'
    Resolving nemesis... 72.232.databank.ip
    Connecting to nemesis|72.232.databank.ip|:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: 104,857,600 (100M) [application/octet-stream]
    
    100%[====================================>] 104,857,600    9.12M/s    ETA 00:00
    
    15:57:21 (8.69 MB/s) - `100mb.bin' saved [104857600/104857600]  
    
    --- nemesis ping statistics ---
    11 packets transmitted, 11 received, 0% packet loss, time 9997ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 33.660/34.067/34.501/0.324 ms
    To show your server can really crank out 100mbit, from my server in LT's Databank DC to your server:
    Code:
     --16:00:25--  http://72.232.246.242/test.exe
               => `test.exe'
    Connecting to 72.232.246.242:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: 278,927,592 (266M) [application/octet-stream]
    
    100%[====================================>] 278,927,592   11.20M/s    ETA 00:00
    
    16:00:50 (10.53 MB/s) - `test.exe' saved [278927592/278927592] 
    
    --- 72.232.246.242 ping statistics ---
    11 packets transmitted, 11 received, 0% packet loss, time 9998ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.332/0.459/0.582/0.080 ms
    Okay, what should I set my TCP window size too?

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    1,648
    Quote Originally Posted by BankRobber
    Okay, what should I set my TCP window size too?
    That really depends on a number of factors including the amount of ram in your server, your expected number of TCP connections, average latency, etc.

    Absent all of those details, I'd start off by doubling it. NOTE: a reboot is required for the registry change to take effect.
    Eric Spaeth
    Enterprise Network Engineer :: Hosting Hobbyist :: Master of Procrastination
    "The really cool thing about facts is they remain true regardless of who states them."

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    5,084
    BankRobber,

    We all went through this with you before on your last thread regarding your godaddy server.

    http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=564986

    Honestly just because you have a FIOS connection it doesn't mean you will get Microsoft Akamai speeds everywhere. The 1.2 you are quoting is 300k higher than you are getting. Is this server only for you or for many people to use? If its for many, please don't get hung up over your speeds. If its only for you, and you must get >1mb speeds sustained then you need to find someone with Verizon bandwith in close proximity to you. I am assuming you are on FIOS with Verizon.

    There is nothing wrong with the speeds you are getting. I will bet that 10 people downloading that same file at the same time will all get those speeds. You can try here for a utility or tweaks for your settings but your chasing ghosts on this.

    http://www.dslreports.com/

    Good luck I know these comments won't help like the last advice people gave you in the other thread but I had to try.
    André Allen | E: aallen(a)linovus.ca
    Linovus Holdings Inc
    Shared Hosting, Reseller Hosting, VPS, Dedicated Servers & Public Cloud | USA, Canada & UK - 24x7x365 Support

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    10,574
    I just solved some issues I had with another server of mine...all I did was add these to my /etc/sysctl.conf and do sysctl -p in SSH

    net.core.rmem_default = 256960
    net.core.rmem_max = 256960
    net.core.wmem_default = 256960
    net.core.wmem_max = 256960

    net.ipv4.tcp_timestamps = 0
    net.ipv4.tcp_sack =1
    net.ipv4.tcp_window_scaling = 1

    I am now getting a lot faster speeds, at least 300% better, sometimes even more.

    So, yes, what spaethco said could definitely improve your speeds.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    687
    Use a download manager (leechget.net)

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,634

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
    Posts
    4,974

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    418
    We already told you to not expect so high speeds in your old thread, you will not get microsoft speeds from any server you buy at budget level... If you're using this server for just yourself, then you could crank your TCP bytesize up, but i wouldn't do that if you have others downloading from the server as well..
    || Semi-professional PHP developer || Exams right now, don't I just feel lucky? ||

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •