I forgot to add two more statstics:
4. copying from windows to colinux using 192.168.0.11 gives me 6Mbytes per sec. This is much slower than copying to 10.3.75.2.
5. copying from colinux tow windows using 192.168.0.2 (thru router) gives me 3.5Mbytes per sec. This is faster than 2Mbytes for 10.3.75.1.
one more question: Why is speed so different in one direction (windows to colinux) compared to the other direction (colinux to windows)?
Sunil <email@example.com> wrote:
After getting some encouraging words about loopback here, I did some testing to see if there was any advantage in using loopback for X. I was totally let down speed wise. I don't know if I did something wrong. Here is a rundown of what I tried:
I created a microsoft loopback adapter called "MS-Loopback". Assigned it IP 10.3.75.1, 255.255.255.0, gw=10.3.75.1. Its listed as 10Mbps. (why??)
Then I installed winpcap 3.1. I used eth0=pcap-bridged,"MS-Looback"
and eth1=tuntap,"TAP-Win32". "TAP-Win32" is bridged with
"Internet" adaper which is connected to my router.
I assigned IP of 10.3.75.2, gw=10.3.75.1 to eth0 in colinux. I assigned IP of 192.168.0.11, gw=192.168.0.1 to eth0. And proceeded to test speeds:
1. Using 10.3.75.2 address, scp from Windows to colinux goes at the speed of 14Mbytes per sec.
2. scp from colinux to Windows using 10.3.75.1 goes at 2Mbytes per sec. If invoke scp from colinux which copies from Windows to colinux, the rate becomes 5Mbytes per sec.
3. X is sloppy when I query 10.3.75.2. X is faster when I query 192.168.0.11. This is clearly visible when I switch workspaces in gnome.
So, why is it that the X connection thru the physical router is faster than the MS loopback connection?
Why from windows to colinux the speed is faster but its 1/7th the other way? Why are loopback adapters shown as 10Mbps? Is there a way to change that?
Did I do something wrong?
Thanks for your time,
PS: I forgot to mention that I am using colinux-060309 Henry's snapshot.
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.