none
server 2008 R2 core - slow file copy

    Question

  • I've got an interesting situation.  I'm working on a dual quad core Xeon 2.5GHz machine with 10GB of RAM and a 3 drive SATA raid 5 on a 3ware hardware RAID controller.  I loaded the machine with server core 2008 R2 to run Hyper-V and i noticed that it was taking a rediculously long time to copy some VHD files to the computer.  after 3.5 hrs a 42GB VHD had not completed.  i was attempting to copy from one core machine to another but after 3.5 hrs i gave up.

    I instead logged into a windows 7 machine and decided to use it to perform the copy between the two computers and found i was getting about 6MB/s transfer rate on a 1Gb network.  Then I decided to pull the drive from the one machine and added it to the target machine figuring the problem was with the network.  i tried a xcopy and after 2.5 hrs i gave up on the same 42GB file.  I tried robocopy to see a  progress bar and calculated the file transfer to be about 6MB/s.

    At this point i gave up again and rebuilt the computer with windows 7 x86.  Same machine, same drives, with windows 7 i copied the same file to the same place and got a consistent 38MB/s transfer rate.

    i rebuilt the machine with server core and loaded up my virtual machine and everything runs fine.  however, now my backups appear to be taking about 2.5 times as long as they did before this whole mess started.

    Does anyone know why file transfers from hard drive to hard drive would take significantly longer on server core 2008 R2 than windows 7 on the same machine?

     

    Monday, December 13, 2010 12:25 AM

Answers

  • Hi,

     

    In your description, you mentioned that the file transfer speed between a 1GB network card is about 6MB/S. However, you also mentioned “I tried robocopy to see a progress bar and calculated the file transfer to be about 6MB/s.”, so I would like to know whether this is a local copy from one hard disk to another or a network copy from one computer to another?

     

    If this is a network copy from one computer to another, you can refer to the following post to see whether you can resolve the issue.

     

    Windows 2008 R2 File and Folder Copy Paste very slow over 1000 MB/s LAN

    http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/windowsserver2008r2general/thread/2e14aa58-cb9b-462c-8a9e-7b10be2de3cb

     

    If this is a local copy from one hard drive to another, please try to copy from the file from one partition to anther partition to see whether you get the same issue. You can also try to boot the computer into the Safe Mode to perform the same test. Thanks for your understanding.

     

     

    Best Regards,

    Vincent Hu

     

    Monday, December 13, 2010 5:22 AM
    Moderator

All replies

  • Hi,

     

    In your description, you mentioned that the file transfer speed between a 1GB network card is about 6MB/S. However, you also mentioned “I tried robocopy to see a progress bar and calculated the file transfer to be about 6MB/s.”, so I would like to know whether this is a local copy from one hard disk to another or a network copy from one computer to another?

     

    If this is a network copy from one computer to another, you can refer to the following post to see whether you can resolve the issue.

     

    Windows 2008 R2 File and Folder Copy Paste very slow over 1000 MB/s LAN

    http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/windowsserver2008r2general/thread/2e14aa58-cb9b-462c-8a9e-7b10be2de3cb

     

    If this is a local copy from one hard drive to another, please try to copy from the file from one partition to anther partition to see whether you get the same issue. You can also try to boot the computer into the Safe Mode to perform the same test. Thanks for your understanding.

     

     

    Best Regards,

    Vincent Hu

     

    Monday, December 13, 2010 5:22 AM
    Moderator
  • ·         Hi,

     

    Have you tried the suggestion? I want to see if the information provided was helpful. Your feedback is very useful for the further research. Please feel free to let me know if you have addition questions.

     

     

    Best regards,

    Vincent Hu

     

    Wednesday, December 15, 2010 3:04 AM
    Moderator
  • I had a similar issue having my 2GB-RAM Core 2 DUO reporting over 10MB/Sec with SQLIO while my 6GB-RAM Quad Core i7-930 with 1TB Hard disk (Braccuda Western Digtal) is reporting sometimes less than 1MB/Sec.

    I am still struggling, but was comforted by HD Tune that every looks good. Sequential access was in the range of over 90 MByte/Sec while Random seek was as slow as .

    I was comforted because, when I start a saved VM from Hyper-V, it started in a record time, so I assumed that my problem was a highly defragged Hard disk and also near full hard disk capacity. 

    The issue is multiple fold from my opinion:

    1) Hyper-V slows disk access down. If you can afford to remove Hyper-V to test the theory. In my case that didn't make much of a difference as the issue was highly fragmented hard disk.

    2) Undefragged Hard disk. I used MyDefrag, which is free, for over 6 hours today for its Monthly script.

    3) IDE drivers versus AHCI. I am still struggling with this one, though I have some comfort that AHCI is actually running

    4) Upgrade the BIOS of the hard disk drive to the latest possible. That had no impact.

    5) removed 400 GB of unnecessary data files (old VHD's).

    6) Looked into Versto. Though as I am running a home PC, I don't plan to buy the license.

    None of the above fixed SQLIO reporting around 1MB/Sec, but I am more comfortable that sequential read are superfast.

    I suggest you look at "HD tune" and look at the "extra tests" section and see for yourself the hard disk performance, then determine how long it take for a saved-state VM to start.

    Friday, December 17, 2010 1:45 AM
  • This is how windows 2008 R2 is in fact let me help explane the issue firther so as not to confuse the point into beleving that somehow microsoft is making windows better...

     

    if i cut and past aka move a file from one folder to another on the same computer on the same drive in windows xp / windows 2003 it is immediate ie instantaneous. as all it does is rewrite the pointer to the file, it does not actually move the file itself. but try the same in windows 2008 R2 it will take forever especially if you move a folder containing thousands of small files. but if you go to a windows XP or windows 2003 computer and connect to the same driver over the network. and do the move on the same folder it is again instantaneous.  threfore it is not a problem with the drive or network or file structure or fragmentation of the drive but rather somthing completly wrong with the design of the explorer GUI in windows 2008 R2. 

     

    Please understand i am not just talking a small difference but the folders i moved instantaneously using windows 2003 across the network. Took 6 hours to move when done locally on 2008 R2 the computer.  ?????????.  

     

     

    Come on Microsoft you need to fix this soon.

    Wednesday, December 29, 2010 2:59 AM
  • I'm having an issue as well, not sure it's exactly the same though.

    Spent days on the phone with Dell and VMware trying to isolate the issue.

    First I'll say that all O/S are fully patched, VMware is totally patched and Dell has verifired my Blade Center (20GB/s LAG'D Fiber connections) and SAN configuration.

    OK here is the issue:

    1) When copying files from one 2008R2 VM to the another (on another host) performance is tolerable, about 150-200MB/s.

    2) When copying files from a 2003 SP2 R2 VM to a 2008R2 VM performance is same.

    3) When copying a file locally, IE from the desktop of the 2008 R2 VM server to a folder on the desktop of the server (Same VM, Same VHD) Copy starts extremely fast, 1-2GB/s then about half way through will start to slow down 10-20MB/s, eventually coming to a complete halt.

    It will then occasionally have a short flurry of activity and copy 40 or 50 megs or so at a time over the next 15 to 20 minutes until it finally finishes. It should take less than a minute.

    4) This same operation on a 2003SP2 VM works with the same throughput as item 1 and 2.

    I'm using xpsp3 ISO files to test with, about 500MB copying them six at a time.

    What I'm seeing in VMware and in the SAN management console is very high read latency on the 2008R2 VM.

    I've also run the SQLIO tool and I can make it copy in the 300-500MB/s range if I configure it just right.

    As I said I've had Dells third level engineers and VMware's third level engineers look at all of my configs and everything is correct.

    I've disabled/enabled all of the SMB2, TCP offload and everything else I could search up on the web with no help.

    When it hangs, that status Window says "calculating".

    So all I'm left with is what I saw posted from paboyce above.

    There has to be some issue with the 2008R2 GUI/Explorer.

    Can someone enlighten me on this issue?

    Tell me there is a fix?

    I've got a customer that expects his 300K solution to work, and at decent speeds, but something is not right here.

     

    Friday, December 31, 2010 7:41 PM
  • I've had similar file transfer issues with 2008 R2. Try disabling the Auto-Tuning Level of the host you are copying files from. This dramatically improved file transfer speeds from the host to W2K8 R2.

    The first line lets you verify the setting. If it is 'enabled' or 'normal' you can disable it with the second line. Great new feature, just needs some fine-tuning.

    netsh interface tcp show global
    netsh interface tcp set global autotuninglevel=disabled

    • Proposed as answer by JosephSaad Thursday, July 28, 2011 4:34 PM
    Friday, January 7, 2011 9:38 PM
  • Hi JAFO,

    I tried what you've mention in your post and it seems to be working on Windows 7 computer pretty well for me. I'll check this in a Virtual machine as well. Thanks for that post.

    Cheers,

    Susantha

    Sunday, January 9, 2011 5:17 AM
  • I've got an interesting situation.  I'm working on a dual quad core Xeon 2.5GHz machine with 10GB of RAM and a 3 drive SATA raid 5 on a 3ware hardware RAID controller.  I loaded the machine with server core 2008 R2 to run Hyper-V and i noticed that it was taking a rediculously long time to copy some VHD files to the computer.  after 3.5 hrs a 42GB VHD had not completed.  i was attempting to copy from one core machine to another but after 3.5 hrs i gave up.

    I instead logged into a windows 7 machine and decided to use it to perform the copy between the two computers and found i was getting about 6MB/s transfer rate on a 1Gb network.  Then I decided to pull the drive from the one machine and added it to the target machine figuring the problem was with the network.  i tried a xcopy and after 2.5 hrs i gave up on the same 42GB file.  I tried robocopy to see a  progress bar and calculated the file transfer to be about 6MB/s.

    At this point i gave up again and rebuilt the computer with windows 7 x86.  Same machine, same drives, with windows 7 i copied the same file to the same place and got a consistent 38MB/s transfer rate.

    i rebuilt the machine with server core and loaded up my virtual machine and everything runs fine.  however, now my backups appear to be taking about 2.5 times as long as they did before this whole mess started.

    Does anyone know why file transfers from hard drive to hard drive would take significantly longer on server core 2008 R2 than windows 7 on the same machine?

     

    have you by any chance unticked/disabled he IPv6 protocol in 2008 R2 LAN properties?

    Interestingly, this caused for me the case file transfer slowliness down to 9MB/s. I tried disabling auto-tuning, offload, RSS for minimal gains only... eventually I ticked/enabled again the IPv6 (just told DNS not to listen to it, it's an unneeded protocol on our network) and now 2008 R2 is able to receive file transfers at 24-25MB/s ... weird.

    Wednesday, August 17, 2011 7:52 PM

  • Requirement for full speed ethernet transfers (75% of 1000 every transfer +) is a Non-blocking, wire-speed transmission switch!


    Switches:

    •ZyXEL's GS1100-16 16 Port Desktop GbE Switch is a 16-port 10/100/1000 switch (I'm getting 700-800Mbit or 80Mbyte transfers)

    •ZyXEL's GS1100-24 The GS1100-24 is a 24-port 10/100/1000 switch

    •ZyXEL's GS-108B 10/100/1000Mbps Port Desktop GbE Switch is a 8-port 10/100/1000 switch

    •Cisco SR2024 24-port 10/100/1000 Gigabit Switch

    •SMC Networks - SMC8508T - EZ Switch 10/100/1000 - 8-Port 10/100/1000 Gigabit Unmanaged Switch

    •Linksys SR2016 The 16-Port 10/100/1000 Gigabit


    Please try the examples given but if you don't have the right switch then it won't matter what you do at the OS


    Regards,


    Jason

    Thursday, July 12, 2012 1:06 AM
  • What Is the accepted reate on a 1000 Mbps wired network ?

    My gess it should be around 60-90 Mbps..

    But in most of the cases it's around 25Mbps.

    I have done few testings which gave me below rates ...

    Directly connect two servers without connecting through a network switch                                 >>  20- 30 MBps (No Change to the speed)
    Remove the Virus Guard ( Mcafee )                                                                                                       >>  30-35 MBps ( Slight improvements )
    Manually set the network adaptor speed to 1000Mbps                                                                       >>  30-35 MBps ( Slight improvements )
    Lastly - Reinstall the Windows 2003/2008   in selected two servers  (Without any updates )         >>   80 -100 MBps  

    So I'm just thinking wheter any windows update is causing this issue ? 

    Regards

    Viraj




    • Edited by VirajDE Wednesday, October 17, 2012 2:41 AM
    Wednesday, October 17, 2012 2:39 AM