From: Karl E. Peterson on
Robert Comer wrote:
>> I can't say I've seen this on any other VMs, though? I just tried
>> another, on a different host, and I could sling a 22MB file in moments
>> from host to guest.
>
> With WVPC?

Yep.

> Was VBOX perchance installed also on that box?

Nope.

> It's slow on all my machines, but I don't think every machine behaves
> this way. I don't know the cause.

It seems highly VM specific, here, so there's gotta be a configuration
issue in play.

--
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org


From: Robert Comer on
>It seems highly VM specific, here, so there's gotta be a configuration
>issue in play.

Networking set to NAT vs the physical NIC? I almost always use the
physical NIC.

--
Bob Comer


On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:45:49 -0800, Karl E. Peterson <karl(a)exmvps.org>
wrote:

>Robert Comer wrote:
>>> I can't say I've seen this on any other VMs, though? I just tried
>>> another, on a different host, and I could sling a 22MB file in moments
>>> from host to guest.
>>
>> With WVPC?
>
>Yep.
>
>> Was VBOX perchance installed also on that box?
>
>Nope.
>
>> It's slow on all my machines, but I don't think every machine behaves
>> this way. I don't know the cause.
>
>It seems highly VM specific, here, so there's gotta be a configuration
>issue in play.
From: Karl E. Peterson on
Robert Comer wrote:
>> It seems highly VM specific, here, so there's gotta be a configuration
>> issue in play.
>
> Networking set to NAT vs the physical NIC? I almost always use the
> physical NIC.

That might be it, yep! I just tried on another with NIC, and it was
also painfully slow reading a host share.

--
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org


From: Robert Comer on
I'll do some testing to when I get a chance, never thought there might
be a difference there...

--
Bob Comer


On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 11:26:40 -0800, Karl E. Peterson <karl(a)exmvps.org>
wrote:

>Robert Comer wrote:
>>> It seems highly VM specific, here, so there's gotta be a configuration
>>> issue in play.
>>
>> Networking set to NAT vs the physical NIC? I almost always use the
>> physical NIC.
>
>That might be it, yep! I just tried on another with NIC, and it was
>also painfully slow reading a host share.
From: Karl E. Peterson on
Robert Comer wrote:
> I'll do some testing to when I get a chance, never thought there might
> be a difference there...

After some more testing here, this (NAT vs NIC) doesn't seem to be the
issue. <sigh>

--
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org