rejetto forum

speed test

rejetto · 48 · 15597

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline m107

  • Occasional poster
  • *
    • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Sorry m107, but without saying how many ms/kg hfs needs to get 1 MGB  y can't get any remote idea what is the weight (in mg) of your server .. nor what you try to say.

Perhaps 'remote upload from' means download? ¿ and then what?

Sorry, but i didn't understand you :-[

If you mean "remote upload"T I mean that speed of transferring from file from my win 2003 server to Hotfile.com is ~65 but transferring speed to storage.to is ~800 .


Offline rejetto

  • Administrator
  • Tireless poster
  • *****
    • Posts: 13308
    • View Profile


Offline rejetto

  • Administrator
  • Tireless poster
  • *****
    • Posts: 13308
    • View Profile

Offline Mars

  • Operator
  • Tireless poster
  • *****
    • Posts: 2015
    • View Profile
You should postulate for a work for the NASA

That leaves dreamer, is not it? ;)


Offline m107

  • Occasional poster
  • *
    • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Is there any way to have more speed?
is there any similar software?


Offline rejetto

  • Administrator
  • Tireless poster
  • *****
    • Posts: 13308
    • View Profile
here you can find
http://www.rejetto.com/wiki/index.php/HFS:_Similar_software

you have 20Mbit/s in upload, so you can get a max of 2.5 MByte/s
to get such speed with a single download, anyway, the downloader must have a true(tested) 20Mbps connection on its side.


Offline GaMEChld

  • Occasional poster
  • *
    • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
I've been using the 2.2f Speed Test version from this thread basically straight from October 2009 till now (I was on the first page as Guest "Vik").

I was just wondering if there has been any shocking developments in the beta versions that should warrant leaving this trusty version behind? I notice the official stable version is still 2.2f, so I wasn't too sure.

Thanks again for this program Rejetto, it is so useful that it defies description.


Offline rejetto

  • Administrator
  • Tireless poster
  • *****
    • Posts: 13308
    • View Profile
2.3 has a number of new features I cannot remember.
My favorite ones are scripting and user groups.
30% of users are already using it.


Offline raybob

  • Tireless poster
  • ****
    • Posts: 453
    • View Profile
    • FileSplat.com
For me, my internet connection is what limits my bandwidth.

When transferring over my 100Mb/s LAN, I typically get speeds in excess of 5 MB/s with one connection, upload and download.  That's plenty.

For me, the real speed is problem is when generating very large pages.  For example, building a page of 242 mp3 files (that's 23,000 HTML lines based on my template  :D ) takes HFS around 2.8 seconds.  This number increases dramatically based on the number of conditionals in the [file] section.  This is on a Core i7 system.  Again, that's not too slow considering my internet speed, but other pages normally take less than 0.1 seconds to generate.


Offline raybob

  • Tireless poster
  • ****
    • Posts: 453
    • View Profile
    • FileSplat.com
For me HFS supports a maximum global speed upload and download of around 5.0 MB/s.  From what I see the limitation is CPU, where when transferring at this speed HFS is using 100% of its CPU core.



Offline joske

  • Occasional poster
  • *
    • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
For me, my internet connection is what limits my bandwidth.

When transferring over my 100Mb/s LAN, I typically get speeds in excess of 5 MB/s with one connection, upload and download.  That's plenty.

For me, the real speed is problem is when generating very large pages.  For example, building a page of 242 mp3 files (that's 23,000 HTML lines based on my template  :D ) takes HFS around 2.8 seconds.  This number increases dramatically based on the number of conditionals in the [file] section.  This is on a Core i7 system.  Again, that's not too slow considering my internet speed, but other pages normally take less than 0.1 seconds to generate.
We are talking about upload on an internet connection, read the topic before answering with useless facts. Off course your LAN speed is that high. The speed problem only happens on internet connections. It has probably something to do with latency and the amount of hops in the route between HFS server and downloader. The speed version speed is a bit better but the speed is not stable, it's climbing up until max upload and falling back every 15 seconds, then climbing up back..


Offline raybob

  • Tireless poster
  • ****
    • Posts: 453
    • View Profile
    • FileSplat.com
Right.  I was saying my LAN speed so I could illustrate to you that HFS is NOT what's causing your guys' speed problems, because it is capable of much higher.


Offline joske

  • Occasional poster
  • *
    • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
hfs IS the problem.
The problem is less clear on LAN connections but the HFS (http) speed is still slower than for example an FTP transfer over your LAN.
In my case: The same file, transfered with HFS: 2,23MB/s, transfered with Filezilla: 2,7MB/s
On a WAN connection, the situation is much worse.
I have an upload limit of 450KB/s but my upload speed with a single file transfer with HFS varies between 15KB/s and 200KB/s !!!!

Screenshot of a transfer on a dedicated 450KB/s upload line:


Update
With the normal 2.2 version, the speed is very limited but stable (on LAN and on WAN connections)
+- stable 40% of max possible speed.

With 2.2 speed edition, the speed is less limited but very unstable.
+- variable speed between 5% and 70% of max possible speed.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2012, 12:42:38 PM by joske »


Offline rejetto

  • Administrator
  • Tireless poster
  • *****
    • Posts: 13308
    • View Profile
In my case: The same file, transfered with HFS: 2,23MB/s, transfered with Filezilla: 2,7MB/s

i wouldn't expect more than that. HFS efforts are not focused on speed.
for the other problem, let's continue on the other topic.