问题摘要：
运行存储迁移服务作业时在 LAN 上遇到高延迟 - 将共享数据从一个 DC 复制到另一个 DC。延迟下降相当当使用简单的 robo 脚本时。
细节：
传统上，我使用机器人脚本，效果很好。我一直在测试Windows Admin Center在运行 2019 Server OS 的 Hyper-V VM 上。特别是，我一直专注于存储迁移服务。
环境：
DC-02：安装了 SMS 的 Windows Server 2019。
WAC（Windows 管理中心虚拟机）：安装并运行 WAC 的 2019 操作系统。
DC-01：2008 R2，包含所有公司股份。
通过 SMS 从 DC-01 --> DC-02 进行的传输使 LAN 变得缓慢。相反，当我运行所有目录的 robo 时，几乎没有影响。我运行了一些持续的 ping 来增加色彩。
以下测试显示了没有 SMS 作业正在运行与有 SMS 作业正在运行之间的明显区别：
Pinging servername.local [IP] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=132ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=210ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=214ms TTL=128
Request timed out.
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=191ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=239ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=206ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=208ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=192ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=214ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=211ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=209ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=213ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=210ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=228ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=224ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=138ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=217ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=225ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=194ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=169ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=226ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=223ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=255ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=215ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=229ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=224ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=208ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=91ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=193ms TTL=128
上面没有显示延迟后来达到 800ms+。压缩结果。
以下显示了 robo 作业运行与未运行之间的区别：
Pinging servername.local [IP] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=74ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=96ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=104ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=37ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=128
Reply from IP: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=128
没有任何明显的迹象表明问题可能出在哪里。我已阅读了他们的知识库和相关的一百多页文档。我需要第二双眼睛。
有什么想法吗？我更喜欢 Robo，但如果 SMS 能够超越文件迁移（他们说可以），那么使用它而不让一切停止就好了。