Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Switch vs. Hub

by badogg Oct 7, 2004 8:51AM PDT

Good Day all...

I am having some performance issues with a network accounting package, and talking with the IT person at the developer I am being told by him that using a switch with network intensive software such as this over a mapped network drive isn't going to do as well as using a hub would..

He says: "It seems to have to do with the number of files that each workstation has open when they are in the software. Switches don't seem to be able to handle that traffic as well as hubs could"

This really doesn't sound accurate according to everything that I am reading on-line about hubs and switches. I am actually reading that it is the other way around where the switch should better handle the load whereas a hub wouldn't..

Am I wrong here??

Thank you...

Discussion is locked

5 Posts
- Collapse + Expand Details
- Collapse -
Re: Switch vs. Hub
by r. proffitt Forum moderator Oct 7, 2004 9:06AM PDT

Dumb hubs are deadly for business use. With a switched hub not only can machine 1 talk to machine 2 at the same time that machine 3 talks to server 10, but if Buffy's machine's network card fails it does not bring the entire company network down.

Give the price of switched 10/100 hubs you can't afford to keep a dumb hub in a business.

It's the cheapest way to speed up a LAN.

In closing, I don't find dumb hubs in many businesses since most got tired of the problems.

Bob

- Collapse -
Re: Switch vs. Hub
by badogg Oct 7, 2004 9:09AM PDT

So, if I understand you correctly, a switch should be way more efficient than a dumb hub and have no problem with accessing info via a mapped drive. Right?

Thanks...

- Collapse -
Re: Switch vs. Hub
by r. proffitt Forum moderator Oct 7, 2004 10:26AM PDT

I've never heard or read that a switched hub would do that. And certainly have never found this to be true. Just sharing that I've tossed dozens of non-switched hubs in the trash bins over the years. They cost the companies too much to leave in the network. Hope this helps clear that up.

Remember that switched hubs are "commodity items" with 8 ports being some under 20 bucks. http://www.compgeeks.com/details.asp?invtid=SIL-A-8309&cat=NET The loss that a company usually experiences because of the unswitched hubs usually hits the thousands of bucks.

Bob

- Collapse -
Re: Switch vs. Hub
by Tman1 Oct 7, 2004 1:20PM PDT

That IT person is a moron, stop talking to him.

- Collapse -
Re: Switch vs. Hub
by RazT Oct 13, 2004 4:44AM PDT

You are correct. I'm not sure why your IT guy is telling you that Hubs are better.. they are not. There are one or two other things you may want ot check as well.

1. Make sure that the port on the switch that the PC is plugged in to is running at 100Mb full duplex, if it is set to auto it doesn't always mean that it is.

2. Make sure that the NIC on the PC is also set to 100Mb full duplex.

3. If your network has VLAN's make sure that the router is configured correctly and that there aren't any Routing Loops. It might be wise to put the server and the PC on the same VLAN if they are not already. If they are check to see if the PC has a HOSTS and LMHOSTS file configured properly.

4. Check to see how large a packet size the router is allowing if you are crossing a router.

5. Check to see how many file locks the software has allowed. It may even be down to the PC not being beefy enough.

Hope this helps.

Raz.

Back to Networking & Wireless forum

CNET Forums

Operating Systems
Software
Electronics & Gadgets
Hardware
Tablets & Mobile Devices
General Help
Brand Forums
Roadshow Autos
Off Topic

Other Forums

Forum Info