Cpu usage

slv · 01-21-2003, 02:34 AM

Hello to everyone.

When transferring big files in a 100mbit/s network my cpu usage goes really high, I wonder is it just flashFXP that does it or is it a property of ftp protocol? Task manager says that flashfxp is using 80-90% of cpu time.

When doing transfers in linux with a weaker machine it still feels like the loads arent so big, even wit same speed (10 MB/sec)..

I have a amd 1700+ with 512 sdram, 7200 rpm hd and windoze xp (3com network adapter). I dont think it has anything to do with my computer...

So is there anything to do about this, so that my computer would be "usable" while transferring big files.

Anyway, great program otherwise.

Cheers,
slv

MxxCon · 01-21-2003, 03:01 AM

are you transfering ssl encrypted?
if so on high speed transfers cpu usage can get pretty high..
what's your flashfxp build?

slv · 01-21-2003, 03:40 AM

No, i am not using encrypted transfers. Just the normal ftp transfers in my lan.

I have used several different versions and havent noticed any real differences.

[edit] currently im using the newest version 2.0.908

D0M1N8R · 01-25-2003, 02:28 AM

Windows just sux =)

dunno much but while I upload files from my linux box to my windows box I can do tons and not feel a performance drop to much. go on windows machine while this is happening and its very skippy.

bigstar · 01-25-2003, 03:23 AM

FlashFXP will use all available cpu usage to transfer the file as fast as possible. You can lower the cpu usage by limiting the transfer speed via the Preferences -> Transfer Tab.

darkone · 01-25-2003, 04:37 AM

100% cpu usage sounds weird though, on my local tests i get flashfxp to transfer 1gb file @ ~18megs/sec with only ~50-60% cpu usage (p4 2ghz), 5000rpm disks (from drive to another)

[11:15:22] Transferred 1 file totaling 1_138_259_607 bytes in 01:00 (18_389,36 KBps)

darkone · 01-25-2003, 04:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by D0M1N8R
Windows just sux =)

dunno much but while I upload files from my linux box to my windows box I can do tons and not feel a performance drop to much. go on windows machine while this is happening and its very skippy.

Linux has much better disk caching than windows. (not sure how well it's done in server versions of windows, propably somewhat/much better)

slv · 01-25-2003, 05:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by bigstar
FlashFXP will use all available cpu usage to transfer the file as fast as possible. You can lower the cpu usage by limiting the transfer speed via the Preferences -> Transfer Tab.

Im sure you could optimise the code... Because in a 100Mbit network the theorical maximun is about 11,5 MB/s, and i can get that kind of speed with 500-600 mhz cpu. Then when i have 1000 MHz:s more i still get the same speed and still way too big cpu usage.

bigstar · 01-25-2003, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by slv
Im sure you could optimise the code... Because in a 100Mbit network the theorical maximun is about 11,5 MB/s, and i can get that kind of speed with 500-600 mhz cpu. Then when i have 1000 MHz:s more i still get the same speed and still way too big cpu usage.

If i could optimize the code anymore I would, I can't.

darkone · 01-25-2003, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by slv
Im sure you could optimise the code... Because in a 100Mbit network the theorical maximun is about 11,5 MB/s, and i can get that kind of speed with 500-600 mhz cpu. Then when i have 1000 MHz:s more i still get the same speed and still way too big cpu usage.

FlashFXP's main purpose is to FXP files...

MxxCon · 01-25-2003, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dark0n3
FlashFXP's main purpose is to FXP files...

not really.
FlashFXP's main purpose is to be ftp client, which also includes fxp.

darkone · 01-25-2003, 10:09 PM

Yes, but if you prefer speed over anything else, you should be using command prompt ftp - or another operating system. (I know, that it's possible to get better performance with different implementations... but if author says, that it would require major (= too much) changes in core to be worthwhile, we should all shut up)
IMO FlashFXP's efficiency is sufficient as is (~15% cpu usage on 10mb/sec transfers..) - all optimizations are welcome, but not neccessary (on client side I prefer functionality over performance)