Customer recently upgraded their server to win2008 64 bit. Upgraded firmware on 3035; SMB - finally got it to work but a single page takes about 45 sec to reach destination. FTP a better option?
-
-
Re: SMB very slow
What file type are you using for the scan: PDF, TIFF? What is the resolution? Forty-five seconds isn't a terrible amount of time for a scan. It sounds more like an issue of network traffic rather than an issue with the machine or the server. -
Re: SMB very slow
Also check the communication status when it sends. When the memory goes back to 100% and the green comm light goes out then the data is now in the hands of the network. If it takes significant time from that point to show up in the folder then that's their issue.Comment
-
It's pdf and it takes forever to say 100%.Originally posted by teebee1234:286223
Once it does, the scanned doc is @ desktop immediately.
It was very fast with older server, almost instant.Comment
-
Re: SMB very slow
Just weighing in, that I have an MP2510 on a very small network, scanning via SMB to a single folder on a WIN XP box (acting as server).
Just like Dexor, the memory remains at 99% (or whatever) for 45s to a minute, before sending, and then it is immediately in the folder. It's been this way since I set it up several months ago, I even tried another PC with no change, and then blamed their network switch, and they went out and spent $400+ on a new one, and no change (oops)
It's not a big deal, I'm just interested in any other reasoning for this happening too.Comment
-
Re: SMB very slow
Is the scan path to a computer name (eg \\server) or an IP address (eg \\192.168.2.2) as it could be taking a while to resolve the name? This is assuming that you have both the DNS and WINS settings in the machine. WINS, thinking about it, would be an excellent place to start.
Also, have you tried forcing the speed of the NIC in the machine to 100mbps? Or even 10mbps?Comment
-
Re: SMB very slow
I did have to use \\192.xxx.xxx.xxx format as dumb Ricoh machines can't understand computer names. DNS is on, WINS not - but does it matter since I use numbers?
I did monkey around with NIC speeds, settled for auto as this connection seems to be so fragile - like taking a nun for a date.Comment
-
Re: SMB very slow
Agree with the ip address instead of server name !Comment
-
Re: SMB very slow
Thanks for the advice. It looks like the PC-name is the likely cause. It never crossed my mind, because I use the PC name instead of IP in a lot of cases (IE: when small offices without a server want scans directly to each PC), and I've never had this particular issue. I assumed that as long as it was 'working', the problem was going to be on their end. I'll give it a go next time I'm there.Comment
-
Re: SMB very slow
There is a problem using the ip address of the host. most computers on networks use DHCP causing the ip address to change after a bootup. then scanning will not work until you enter the new ip address into the copier again. Best to use the host name. In my oppinion.Comment
-
Re: SMB very slow
This is true, however they are normally reissued with the same IP address unless the DHCP server runs out of free addresses as it links the IP address to the MAC address of the network card in the PC. The IP address could be allocated to another device if there are no free IPs and the intial device is switched off.
Having said all that, if you're scanning to a server, whether it be 2008 Server or an XP machine, it's best practice to have this on a static IP or to tie the MAC address to a specific IP address outside of the DHCP pool so that it's always the same and, if you do this, scanning to an IP address rather than a PC name is better as it doesn't have to look up the resolution of the name using either DNS or WINS.Comment
Comment