Slow Transfer rate

[lan78]

I have the exact same problem. All settings seem to be ok and connected directly to my pc via gigabit. But it seems like the mybook is always working! Reading or writing while nothing is going on my side. What can this be?

[Myron]

Just verify that all the links are operating at gigabis speeds.

This is unrelated, but Netgear switches have a habit of malfunctioning. Some capacitor goes faulty so the switch rapidly connects and disocnnects and the line speed when that happens is S-L-O-W !!!!

---

Walid wrote:

Disabling this setting doesn't make a difference.

---

[Walid]

I baught a Cisco se2500 gigabit switch and the maximum speed for copying from and to the MBL is 10 MB/s considering that (PC-Switch-MBL) are all 10/100/1000 !!!!

[anotherpaul]

---

Walid wrote:

I baught a Cisco se2500 gigabit switch and the maximum speed for copying from and to the MBL is 10 MB/s considering that (PC-Switch-MBL) are all 10/100/1000 !!!!

---

The item that need to be stated is the size(s) of the files being xferred; e.g. small files, "large" files, mixed, lots.

I also ge around 11 MBs IF I'm doing about 8-10 gigs of audio files (flac) that are around 30-50 megs; but if I'm doing 30-40 gigs of audio then the xfer speed goes up to 26-35 MBs; looks like how my app calculates stuff to be xferred & the overhead of writing/reading & win7 security essentials checking everything including whether I have the "permission" to do access & write each file even if I'm the only user & admin.

Then I've found that the 8-10 gigs will go 35-40 MBs if they were video files of about 1 gig each (I just do uncompressed to/from the MBL).

Quite "interesting" on how file xfers are calculated & what impact various file lengths impact the transfer rates; & perhaps how much the "security" aspects create problems.  Of course, the biggest culprit could be the Windows Limitations of a max length of the full pathnames (including filename) of 260 bytes; and/or the max length of just length of the path of about 248 bytes; got hit with that one a few times while ripping my CDs as was considered errors.

[Myron]

This switch has some intellegence built into it.  Like QoS and per-port power management.  In wonder if the switch is not correctly configuring the port the MBL is connected to. Thing is with this switch there is no way of determining how the switch has configured its QoS.

Maybe try a dumber network switch?

---

Walid wrote:

I baught a Cisco se2500 gigabit switch and the maximum speed for copying from and to the MBL is 10 MB/s considering that (PC-Switch-MBL) are all 10/100/1000 !!!!

---

[Walid]

Now i am also using Cat 6 cables and the speed average is 6 MB/s !!!!!!

[Morac]

I'm trying to copy about 800 GB worth of files from an external USB 2.0 drive to my MyBookLive I recently bought.  It's been upgraded to the most recent firmware.  The drive is connected to a Linksys E3000 (Gigabit) router.  My PC is connected to the router via a MoCA 1.1 bridge network.  I've seen speeds upwards of 70 mbps of traffic over the MoCa bridge so that shouldn't be a bottleneck.

Looking at my network traffic, the transfer is maxing out at 47.8 Mbps (5.7 Mbps) with an average of about 40 Mbps (5 MB/s). That's pretty slow.

Is that the fastest this drive can transfer at?

Edit:

I think it could be my laptop.  I have my laptop and PS3 hooked into the same switch, which then connects via a pair of MoCa bridges to my router.  While transfering from my laptop to the drive, I tried uploading files to a FTP server on the net.  I couldn't exceed about 50 Mbps despite getting 6 Mbps on speed tests.   I ran a speed test on the PS3 and got 4.65 Mbps up while transfering about at about 43 Mbps to the drive.

[Morac]

Here's something odd, when I copy to one share transfer maxes out at about 5.7 MByte/s.  If I copy to two shares at a time, I've managed to hit 9.3 MByte/s.   That makes little sense to me since in this case I'm copying from the same source (external USB drive) to a 2 TB My Book Live which only has one physical drive.  I can't see any reason why copying multiple streams should be faster than copying a single stream.

[TonyPh12345]

---

Morac wrote:

I can't see any reason why copying multiple streams should be faster than copying a single stream.

---

because file transfers are (usually) single-threaded. Doing multiple streams means multiple threads, which is much more efficient.