I though that it didn't matter to connect a router to the uplink port or regular switch port of a switch.
but is there any difference between a regular switch port and an uplink port ? other than speed and crossover...
i use to have my router (2801, 100Mb NIC) on the Gi1 and my server (1000Mb NIC) to the Gi2 uplink port.
The others device such as IP Phones, desktops and access points on the regular Fa ports (100Mb). Everything was working OK.
I recently installed a new server with 1000Mb NIC, so i moved the router from the Gi1 to the Fa1 port because both have only 100Mb.
Now i am experiencing slower server access (AD) and sometime network delay (1 to 5 sec) on both server.
Voice VLAN, router access and smartport roles are fine.
Someone can help ?
Table 2 in http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps6545/product_data_sheet0900aecd80322aeb.html indicates "wire-speed performance" and the Mpps and Gbps spec numbers would support that claim.
Your router-switch connection is running at 100/full and no interface errors on either device? If so, one would think you moving off the gig uplink port, on this device, shouldn't matter.
However, what might be happening, since you now have a server running off a gig port, it could be filling other 100 Mbps ports. Remember, it will send to individual 100 Mbps ports at gig speed. For a test, leave the server on the gig port but set it down to 100. Doing this, you will more likely now see aggregate congestion to the server, but see if the overall performance appears better.
I haven't worked with the CE series, but I suspect you can't "see" into the device as well as you can on the "higher end" switches. So, it might be much harder to "see" port congestion.