Speed problem

[WarBirD]

Hi, i installed HFS just a few days ago. Today I had time to test it with a friend, over HAMACHI. When we try FTP over HAMACHI, i can offer my full upload, which is around 90 KB/sec. but when we tried it with HFS, my friend only got like 10 KB/sec. and even less. I did not use any Speed Limit and I didn´t had anything using my bandwidth while we tried it. So why do I only have that less speed to offer, which is not a problem with my connection.

I would appreciate help in this.

WarBirD

[rejetto]

i never used hamachi, and know little of it, but i have a theory.
FTP when is about to transfer a file, start a new connection. I think you are bypassing hamachi when transfering over FTP, and that's why you get your full speed.
This same technique is not possible over HTTP.

[WarBirD]

Well, what HFS does is behave like a small Webserver, so it actually doesn´t matter how I do transfer a file. Even if I do a regular Webserver on my PC, when someone wants to download something, he gets my full upload speed for his filetransfer to download. And since HFS also creates a little Webserver, where is the difference. And no, I don´t think its bypassing.

[rejetto]

if you tested with another webserver on your PC, then you are right, HFS should go fast as well.
maybe you enabled the speed limiter.
try going to (expert mode) menu -> other options -> show customized options
and post here the content



anyway, it is quite strange, i always heard of hamachi being slow, few KB/s, and you tell it is fast.

[WarBirD]

Here is the info you asked for:

window-max=yes
default: no

easy=no
default: yes

last-update-check=39055,6542225463
default: 0

last-file-open=C:\Dokumente und Einstellungen\warbird\Eigene Dateien\hfs_save_011206.vfs
default:

recents=C:\Dokumente und Einstellungen\warbird\Eigene Dateien\hfs_save_011206.vfs
default:

connections-columns=IP;120|Filename;180|Status;180|Speed;60|Time left;55|%;686|
default: IP;120|Filename;180|Status;180|Speed;60|Time left;55|%;50|

I didn´t set any SPEED LIMIT in the options, I let this empty.

[rejetto]

right... but i have no idea!
do you get 100% CPU while HFS is sending?

[maverick]

do you get 100% CPU while HFS is sending?

I did a local upload test.  Everything that uses bandwidth was closed except for Opera to initiate the upload.  No HFs speed limit set.  No software firewall, anti-virus, spyware checker etc. running in the background. 

I uploaded the same 52.23 mb file 4 times.  Here are the results.

1. average 2728 KB/s - 100% CPU while HFS sending
2. average 1690 KB/s - 100% CPU    "      "       "
3. average 1760 KB/s - 100% CPU    "      "       "
4. average 1647 KB/s - 100% CPU    "      "       "

Don't know why the upload speed decreased so much after the 1st test.  Don't know if these test results will help but here they are anyway.

[rejetto]

uploading and downloading locally with no limit always take 100% CPU.
i think the speed variation on your test doesn't depend on HFS.

[TSG]

I have a 128k upload speed, this should equate to 16kb\s? am i right? but i find that when people download from me, the maximum i get going is 12.8kb\s, is this normal for HFS? cause at these speeds 3.2kb\s is a lot of bandwidth ROFL!

[rejetto]

yes, 16kb/s.
the way to know if the lower speed is related to HFS, is to try using another webserver and see if it goes faster.

[maverick]

uploading and downloading locally with no limit always take 100% CPU.
i think the speed variation on your test doesn't depend on HFS.

You are correct.  Just re-tested a local download with speed limit set (simulating a remote download)  and there was only little CPU used during the transfer.

As for the speed variation in the previous upload test, don't know why.

[MarkV]

HTTP protocol simply isn't intended for large file transfers!
For very large file transfers use FTP.

MarkV

[rejetto]

no, i think it's ok for large files, downloading.
it's uploading doesn't work good.

[MarkV]

Of course it works, yes, but...

Hyper Text Transfer Protocol vs. File Transfer protocol

I just wanted to say that HTTP was not created with file transfer in mind, but transferring small website files.
HFS pulls the best out of it, but undoubtedly it is optimized for small files.

The other side is, for HTTP you only need a browser.

I, personally, run both types of server on my machine.


Good Night, MarkV 

[rejetto]

to transfer 1 big file, i see no benefit in using FTP instead of HTTP.
i'm talking about the protocol itself, most http client ar enot a good way to transfer big files.
opera itself sometimes reset my download without asking