Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Filmo · Sep 3, 2004, 05:55 PM

Just moved one of our main machines to 10.3.4 from 10.2.8

File sharing performance has dropped dramatically. Our 100mbit LAN feels like a 10mbit or worse. What used to take seconds to copy large (30+ mb files) is now taking minutes

Likewise when we mount a 9.2.2 volume onto the 10.3.4 machine it takes 3+ minutse to copy a 30mb file that used to take maybe 10 seconds before.

Under 10.2.8, the "Windows 2000 to 10.2.8" or "10.2.8 to Windows 2000" copies where blazing fast. Near capacity on a 100mbit LAN. Not anymore.

While the 10.2.8 to 9.2.2 was pokier than the Windows 2K to 10.2.8 it was only marginally slower.

Now it seems like the network is unusable. (We need to transfer 100s of MB per day between these machines and it's taking 20 minutes to move 150 MB!!!)

What's going on? This seems really crazy to me. I've set everything up on the 10.3.4 machine like we had it before under 10.2.8.

Is there a fix for this or something obvious that I've missed??

Detrius · Sep 4, 2004, 07:51 PM

This is not normal. Make sure that the ethernet port didn't get changed to 10Base-T. Go into System Preferences, the Network. Double click your ethernet interface. Then click the ethernet tab on the far right. Make sure there are no obvious errors. You can even experiment a bit to see if you can fix it easily.

If you aren't using built-in ethernet, make sure you have the latest drivers for your ethernet card.

larkost · Sep 4, 2004, 08:00 PM

One thing to check is that if the computer is on a managed switch, that the port is set to "Auto", and not hard coded to a specific speed/*plexing setting. When one side is hard set, the other side has to be as well... the specs are wonky on this, and you might have changed things just enough in the switchover.

Filmo · Sep 5, 2004, 02:24 PM

The machine in question was a B&W G3 with a SonnetTech 800mhz upgrade.

After installing the SonnetTech 'OS X Tune Up' Beta for 10.3, the ethernet seems back to normal. The OSX Tune Up inables the system to see the L2 and L3 cache on the chip.

I wouldn't have thought that this would make a difference, but it appears to. (Nothing else was changed other than a reboot after installing the cache )...

Weird.