Why is this set up so slow?

This is the set up:

NTL Cable modem -> Linksys WRT54GS wireless router -> PC (hard wired).
Hardwired into the router is a 300GB NAS drive (with 2 USB ports).
Hardwired into the NAS drive is a 160GB USB drive and a printer using the 2
USB ports.

I want to use the NAS as a general storage (accessible by all my wireless
kit) with the 160GB drive as a backup of important stuff from the NAS.

Today I tried to copy 60GB of files but gave up after realising that about 1
and half hours in it had only completed around 4GB! I then tried copying
the same files from the NAS to the D Drive of the PC - just as slow!

Seems to me that the WRT54GS router is creating a terrible bottleneck.
Would you learned people agree that is where the problem lies?

Can anyone suggest a better setup? Would new firmware on the router help
(currently version: v1.52.2, but I've heard of unofficial ones)??

TIA



Neil

"Neil" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bepsi.7234$(E-Mail Removed)...
> This is the set up:
>
> NTL Cable modem -> Linksys WRT54GS wireless router -> PC (hard wired).
> Hardwired into the router is a 300GB NAS drive (with 2 USB ports).
> Hardwired into the NAS drive is a 160GB USB drive and a printer using the
> 2 USB ports.
>
> I want to use the NAS as a general storage (accessible by all my wireless
> kit) with the 160GB drive as a backup of important stuff from the NAS.
>
> Today I tried to copy 60GB of files but gave up after realising that
> about 1 and half hours in it had only completed around 4GB! I then tried
> copying the same files from the NAS to the D Drive of the PC - just as
> slow!
>
> Seems to me that the WRT54GS router is creating a terrible bottleneck.
> Would you learned people agree that is where the problem lies?

There is nothing I can see in what you have written to indicate that the
router is the bottleneck. The most likely way that the router would cause a
problem is by creating a duplex mismatch somewhere (between the NAS and
router, or equally, between the wired PC and router), although I think the
rate is a little higher than is typical for that problem. The most obvious
sign of a duplex mismatch is a highly erratic transfer rate.

What make/model is the NAS? Some are quite slow, like 2-3MB/s (note that
this is about the best rate you will get from 802.11g wireless equipment),
but you are getting significantly less than that.

Copying many small files is generally slower than fewer larger files,
creating directories isn't instantaneous, and a deeply nested directory
structure may slow things down too.

> Can anyone suggest a better setup? Would new firmware on the router help
> (currently version: v1.52.2, but I've heard of unofficial ones)??

Newer router firmware is very unlikely to change the behaviour.

Alex

In article <bepsi.7234$(E-Mail Removed)>, Neil says...
> This is the set up:
>
> NTL Cable modem -> Linksys WRT54GS wireless router -> PC (hard wired).
> Hardwired into the router is a 300GB NAS drive (with 2 USB ports).
> Hardwired into the NAS drive is a 160GB USB drive and a printer using the 2
> USB ports.
>
> I want to use the NAS as a general storage (accessible by all my wireless
> kit) with the 160GB drive as a backup of important stuff from the NAS.
>
> Today I tried to copy 60GB of files but gave up after realising that about 1
> and half hours in it had only completed around 4GB! I then tried copying
> the same files from the NAS to the D Drive of the PC - just as slow!
>
Well what did you expect? You're wanting to shift over 600GBit of data
at best at around 60-70Mbit a second. 10 seconds per MB, 1000 seconds
or roughly 1/4hr per GB. Not allowing for any bandwidth used by other
processes.


--
Conor

It arrived at their repair center last week so only another month or so
to wait

"Conor" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) t...
[snip]
> Well what did you expect? You're wanting to shift over 600GBit of data
> at best at around 60-70Mbit a second. 10 seconds per MB,

Umm, you went wrong here by a factor of 80 or so .

> 1000 seconds or roughly 1/4hr per GB. Not allowing for any bandwidth used
> by other processes.


Alex

"Alex Fraser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed). uk...
> "Conor" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) t...
> [snip]
>> Well what did you expect? You're wanting to shift over 600GBit of data
>> at best at around 60-70Mbit a second. 10 seconds per MB,
>
> Umm, you went wrong here by a factor of 80 or so .
>

I did notice that, but decided not to comment - as Connor doesn't like being
told when he's wrong!! :-)