connecting switch for faster transfer rate..

[CentOS]

---

If its configured with link aggregation or trunking, then yes, unnoticeable bottlenecks and tolerable yet.


But if its applied to an unmanaged switches, even at full duplex 200mbps mode, the single unshielded twisted pair wire shall be the culprit to cause decrease in performance and bottlenecks specially when huge multiple megabits files transferred simultaneously between these switches passing this single cable.

I experienced this with two 16-port standard 200mbps capable unmanaged switch. I transferred megabits of files from a port of switch #1(catering 11 workstations/pc1-pc11) to a port of switch #2(catering 11 workstations/pc12-20/server/mypc). The output was, clients playing counter strike(networked to multiple players on lan divided by the two switches), dota(networked to multiple players on lan divided by the two switches), and hooking-up online in different workstations experienced intolerable lags.

i don't know.. i've just never had any problems with local segments during normal operations except of course when there are other problems like redirects, unwanted broadcasts and other network related issues that are non-physical in nature. We run 2 cascaded 24-port core switches via a single UTP cable, almost all ports are being used, with multiple core routers, access routers, lots of servers and so many workstations (the other core switch has several cascaded non-core switches connecting other computers) and all of which has an internet backbone of 45Mbps and other lesser redudant links... and we've never had switch issues relating to bottlenecks and such. It's a matter controlling your flow of traffic.

[Chipmunk888]

i don't know.. i've just never had any problems with local segments during normal operations except of course when there are other problems like redirects, unwanted broadcasts and other network related issues that are non-physical in nature. We run 2 cascaded 24-port core switches via a single UTP cable, almost all ports are being used, with multiple core routers, access routers, lots of servers and so many workstations (the other core switch has several cascaded non-core switches connecting other computers) and all of which has an internet backbone of 45Mbps and other lesser redudant links... and we've never had switch issues relating to bottlenecks and such. It's a matter controlling your flow of traffic.

the questions are:

1. are these switches unmanaged ones?
2. have you happened or experienced to transfer multiple huge megabits and gigabytes between these switches simultaneously along with active/vast and sensitive lan & wan games?


lots of workstations and servers are not the factors as long as they are configured correctly but the sizes of packets forwarded and received, passing the single cable connecting the switches.

see? as you said, all are connected to an internet backbone of 45mbps, compared to mine which is 1mbps only,lol, thats a hectare difference. that is one of the reason you never felt any decrease in performance or lags in wan side.

by the way, the switch is already a smart hub, has QoS, so as the windows xp operating system, so it has the ability to control the traffic by itself, prioritizing some important packets.

remember, the threadstarter is obviously relating the topic to be applied in his internet cafe. not like a corporate company, i guess in which you are administering, that has a very huge network but a very different network usage style of environment.

[CentOS]

One, it is a misnomer that game packets are heavy.. they only exchange script-like data. It is in no way considered network intensive.

And yes, megabytes of data transfer is a normal occurence for us.

Again, with 45mbps of internet connection, this is more prone to have problems compared to your 1mbps.. why? The more available bandwidth, the more heavy applications are run on the entire network. Since we are only talking on the local segment (I never mentioned about issues on the WAN side), it doesn't matter what goes in and out of your network but what happens within. And with 45mbps, that would add a lot to the already busy local activity.

Yes, both are managed switches but they are currently unmanaged. Why? Because even if your switches are manageable, it's never a good idea to let the switch manage your traffic flow. One, it creates too much overhead. And two, switch algorithms kinda suck.. almost all of them just dumb drop packets.. unlike when you manage them via a router or even PC-based managers.

And lastly, i didn't know he was working a cafe setup.. he never mentioned anything about a cafe. But if it's really a cafe.. then the more pa gyud gani diay nga lesser ang activity. Anyway... if he can do link aggregation.. then go ahead :mrgreen:

[Chipmunk888]

One, it is a misnomer that game packets are heavy.. they only exchange script-like data. It is in no way considered network intensive.

And yes, megabytes of data transfer is a normal occurence for us.

Again, with 45mbps of internet connection, this is more prone to have problems compared to your 1mbps.. why? The more available bandwidth, the more heavy applications are run on the entire network. Since we are only talking on the local segment (I never mentioned about issues on the WAN side), it doesn't matter what goes in and out of your network but what happens within. And with 45mbps, that would add a lot to the already busy local activity.

Yes, both are managed switches but they are currently unmanaged. Why? Because even if your switches are manageable, it's never a good idea to let the switch manage your traffic flow. One, it creates too much overhead. And two, switch algorithms kinda suck.. almost all of them just dumb drop packets.. unlike when you manage them via a router or even PC-based managers.

And lastly, i didn't know he was working a cafe setup.. he never mentioned anything about a cafe. But if it's really a cafe.. then the more pa gyud gani diay nga lesser ang activity. Anyway... if he can do link aggregation.. then go ahead :mrgreen:

yes, youre right, lan and wan games aren't considered intensive network but due to their package exchange is so light, they are sensitive and easily affected by other packets simultaneously transferring along them, and passing the single cable that connects the two switches.

but with that 45mbps speed and connected pa directly sa backbone, grabeh na kaayo na bai oi. thats the same as dedicated line. compared sa standard dsl connection nga 1-2mbps sa mga internet cafe, pisik ra man na intawn sa daghan kaayong connections sa ports sa dslam, nga most of the times dili dyud kaabot 1 or 2mbps pa.

see? that is the reason why you don't have problems about bottlenecks and congestion in relation to the packets passing to that single cable due to you are implementing a flow control that prevents overbandwidth situations in switch environment.

hehe, pardon, i forgot, you didnt know nga naay internet cafe si etgo. and surely that conventional design he is planning will be applied to that internet cafe environment. and its quite a workaround to implement the managing flow of control through pricey router or software. he better buy a 24-port switch instead, lesser hassle, lesser prone to congestion, faster setup, and lesser power consumption pa kay usa nalang ka switch.


OT:

by the way, local company na imo gi administer? pamisik anang inyong 45mbps direct backbone connection hap! =) hehe.

[etgo]

ok, thanks guys

[CentOS]

Our bandwidth management only affects traffic going outside the network.. there's no management for internal clients.. hence, full 100mbps.

Anyway.. mao ra to.. ako ra tong opinion.. kapoy na type