Write and Read speeds

[PikkonMG]

Made this post in pre-sales never got an answer so figured I posted part of my question in wrong area. So ill bring support part of the question over here.

 

Before trying unraid I did some test with 2012 r2 Essentials with storage spaces, and stablebit drive pool, also tried open media vault but didn't pay attention to the test with it.
 
With storage spaces I was getting W/R in 200 range, no ssd cache.
With stablebit using ssd cache drive I was getting writes in 300 range with reads around 200.
With unraid i'm only getting writes in 115 range with ssd cache drive, and reads with 50-80 range, this just seems really really slow.
 
I really like unRAID and will probably still buy it due to low resource usage, docker, vm and ease of use.
 
System is a HP Proliant ML110 Gen7.

tower-diagnostics-20170425-1613.zip

[JorgeB]

31 minutes ago, PikkonMG said:

With unraid i'm only getting writes in 115 range with ssd cache drive

 

I only see gigabit NICs, 115MB/s seems right, am I missing something?

 

32 minutes ago, PikkonMG said:

and reads with 50-80 range

 

See if any of these help with the read speed:

 

 

[PikkonMG]

1 minute ago, johnnie.black said:

 

I only see gigabit NICs, 115MB/s seems right, am I missing something?

 

 

See if any of these help with the read speed:

 

 

 

Only using one in unRAID atm, Have 4 identical Intel Nics in the system but I have been unable to get bonding with load balance to work on unRAID. I don't know if im doing something wrong or what.

[JorgeB]

Bonding won't help with getting speeds over gigabit for a single transfer between unRAID and Windows clients, it may help in the future when Samba supports SMB multichannel, for now it can only help with multiple transfers at the same time or single transfers from Linux clients.

[PikkonMG]

What causes Windows then to have 100% or better transfer speeds? Difference in the protocol?

Edited April 25, 2017 by PikkonMG

[JorgeB]

SMB multichannel

[PikkonMG]

What version of Samba does unRAID use? I see that smb 4.4.0 and up have multi channel support for linux.

[JorgeB]

Disable by default because it's still experimental:

 

CAVEAT: While this should be working without problems mostly,
there are still corner cases in the treatment of channel failures
that may result in DATA CORRUPTION when these race conditions hit.
It is hence

    NOT RECOMMENDED TO USE MULTI-CHANNEL IN PRODUCTION

at this stage. This situation can be expected to improve during
the life-time of the 4.4 release. Feed-back from test-setups is
highly welcome.

 

If server and desktop are close together better option is to get a couple of 10GbE NICs and use a direct attach cable, there are unRAID compatible kits on ebay for less than 100$.

 

 

[PikkonMG]

Don't most 10GbE Nics use SFP connectors? If so I would have to find a switch or something that has SFP support? I have a SPF+ card in my closet that was in the server when I bought it, it's a HP 10GBe Ethernet Network Interface Card. I think it uses Broadcom BCM57810S chip.

 

Only issues is I don't know what kind of switch or anything I would need to get it hooked up to my network.

[JorgeB]

I use these kits, cable can't be too long though, up to 5 meters/16 feet for passive cables:

 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/SET-2x-long-HP-671798-10GbE-Cisco-3m-kit-10Gbit-10Gbase-Ethernet-10Gigabit-10G-/152036022854?hash=item23660d9a46:g:PLUAAOSwJQdW~V5c

[PikkonMG]

So with that it would pretty much be a direct computer to unraid connection?

 

I found a HP 8 rj45 port 2 port SPF 10GBe switch on ebay for $45. Only the 2 SPF ports operate at 10GBe RJ45 are 10/100/1000 on switch from spec sheet.

 

If I buy a second 10GBe card to put in my personal computer and get the cables and use this switch would it allow for fast speeds? Or should I just do a direct connection?

[JorgeB]

If it's just for desktop and server and if the cable limits is not a problem might as well use a direct connection, it's always cheaper, both will need to still use gigabit for internet and to access other computers, it's what I do, my cache read/write speeds are about 900MB/s sustained, obviously your cache device(s) and desktop storage need to keep up to achieve those.

[PikkonMG]

Thanks for the info, I will give one of those kits a shot.