SSD to NAS file transfer over gigabit - why only 30MB/s?

Discussion in 'SSDs & Data Storage' started by feo, May 6, 2012.

  1. feo

    feo Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    183
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    So I just got a new SSD and connected my QNAP NAS to my PC via ethernet.

    Now both the NAS and my PC have gigabit ports yet the file transfer only goes at 35MB/s.

    Why?

    Am I missing something here?
     
  2. Vengance_01

    Vengance_01 [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,658
    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2001
    There are many factors. Even a traditional modern spinner (5400 or 7200RPM) can saturate a 1GBit connection. Here are some things to look at:

    How are you accessing the NAS? CIFs, iscsi, NFS, samba, etc
    Are you transferring large or small files?
    What kind of nics do you have on each side(server and client)
     
  3. mwroobel

    mwroobel [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,909
    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Which QNAP do you have, which SSD and how are the drive(s) in the nas configured. What motherboard do you have, which port are you using and how is it connected to the network? Do you have any other network connected storage devices and is the throughput to them any better?
     
  4. feo

    feo Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    183
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    Accessing it via Samba methinks. Basically just type the name of the server in the location/address bar in Windows Explorer and browse files that way.

    Both large and small files of all types, mainly media like mp3s, SD and HD video and other miscellaneous stuff.

    Both my NAS (QNAP TS-410) and my motherboard on my PC (MSI P55-GD65) have 2 gigabit Ethernet ports each.

    My SSD is an OCZ Vertex 4 256GB. See above for answers to your other questions.

    The NAS is hooked straight into my PCs Ethernet port.

    No other network storage attached so can't compare it to any other transfers.
     
  5. mwroobel

    mwroobel [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,909
    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008

    Well, a few things to check initially. Make sure you have the latest firmware on the QNAP, and the latest Realtek drivers on the motherboard. Your cable must be at least CAT5e (preferably Cat6). I don't know if the Qnap or the Realtek supports auto crossover (or if it is less effecient if it does) so you might need a crossover cable instead of a regular Ethernet cable if you are directly connected without a switch.
     
  6. feo

    feo Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    183
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    QNAP firmware, check.

    Realtek drivers I will check next.

    Cables I know nothing about so I'll try to get CAT6 crossover and see if that helps.
     
  7. mwroobel

    mwroobel [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,909
    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    What does it say on the cable you are using? Cat5, Cat5e?
     
  8. Vengance_01

    Vengance_01 [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,658
    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2001
    I would try setting up a CIFS share and test that.
     
  9. feo

    feo Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    183
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    I'll have to check but I think it may just be CAT5. Will double check for you. It will be written on the cable itself, right?

    Sorry, how would I do that? (sorry in a semi-n00b)
     
  10. Vengance_01

    Vengance_01 [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,658
    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2001
    Not sure on that QNAP. I would recommend googling your model and CIFs share setup.
     
  11. feo

    feo Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    183
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    Will try setting it up. But how exactly will that help in determining why the transfer speed is not closer to 100MB/s as it should be?
     
  12. feo

    feo Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    183
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    Ok well it seems that the cable I had connected was CAT5 but I do have a CAT5e cable lying around so I'll retest the transfer speed using 5e and report back tomorrow.

    Apart from that, having all the latest drivers and firmware and whatnot, I should be expecting closer to 100MB/s, right?
     
  13. faugusztin

    faugusztin 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,634
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2008
  14. feo

    feo Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    183
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
  15. mwroobel

    mwroobel [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,909
    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    If it is just cat 5, you are likely experiencing a lot of errors/retransmissions if it is trying to maintain a gig connection. If it only negotiated a 100MB connection you would only get about 10MB/sec so it looks like it is negotiating a gig connection
     
  16. faugusztin

    faugusztin 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,634
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2008
    Yes, you have to look at write speed. The 10MB/s extra is probably due different type of data copied to the NAS (see the note at bottom saying "*Testing results may vary in different system condition"). Unfortunately, speeds you are seeing are probably the maximum your 800MHz Marvell CPU can handle. There is a reason why more powerfull NAS are using Atom or some even Sandy Bridge Celeron/Pentium CPU.
     
  17. feo

    feo Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    183
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    So is there no way to send files to the NAS from my PC over the network at speeds greater than 30MB/s?
     
  18. feo

    feo Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    183
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    Dammit. Will play around tomorrow a bit and see if I can squeeze out any more using 5e or maybe 6.
     
  19. faugusztin

    faugusztin 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,634
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2008
  20. dustNbone

    dustNbone [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,032
    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    If the NAS is limited in throughput, whether due to it's network interface, or it's onboard processor's ability to calculate parity (RAID5) there is nothing that will make it faster, that's just how fast it goes. I haven't encountered many NAS boxes that could perform much better than what you quoted.
     
  21. mwroobel

    mwroobel [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,909
    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    If you are indeed only using a cat5 cable, that could be causing slow speeds. The theoretical max throughput of gig ethernet is 125MB/s, but it all depends on how fast your NAS can move the data. On a single file transfer, usually you should see 75-100 MB/s if your nas is capable of pushing data out as fast as your ssd is capable of.
     
  22. blood

    blood Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    190
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    It would depend on the file transferred, which is why they say "*Testing results may vary in different system condition". If you are transferring big files only from a speedy host, you would get higher throughput. If you are transferring massive amounts of small files, you would get a lower average throughput.
     
  23. blood

    blood Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    190
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    I would argue that the cable is unlikely the problem. The difference in shielding between Cat 5 and Cat 5e is small.

    It's more typical to get speeds between 20-50 for low end NAS and 50-75 with a mid-range NAS. Due to protocol overhead, and other factors, speeds up to 100MB are fairly rare in practice.

    The realtek LAN card in question here could also be a bottleneck. I have poor experiences with them.

    To get that speed, you'd probably need an intel atom-based NAS (or equivalent). and preferably dual gigabit LAN with teaming function.
     
  24. mwroobel

    mwroobel [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,909
    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Uh, there is no shielding in Cat5 (or Cat5e or Cat6), which is why they are called UTP (Unshielded Twisted Pair). It is the twists in the pairs which rejects interference. If you are trying gigE over straight Cat5 anything longer than a 7-10 foot cable, you will get horrific performance because of retransmissions due to errors.
     
  25. feo

    feo Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    183
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    Is there any way to tell if it's straight or twisted?

    The writing on the cable?
     
  26. mwroobel

    mwroobel [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,909
    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Well, if it is ethernet cable it is twisted pairs. As to what level it is certified to, it will be printed on the cable Jacket. You should look for a marking Like Cat5, Cat5e, Cat6 or 350MHz or 500MHz.
     
  27. serpretetsky

    serpretetsky [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,684
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2008
    pretty sure it's gauranteed to be twisted, i think that's part of the cat5/cat6/etc spec.

    it will say one of the following on the cable:
    utp
    stp
    ftp

    the "tp" part is twisted pair.
     
  28. feo

    feo Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    183
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    Ok well I definitely have 5 and 5e, haven't checked any of the other cables in my house yet.

    Will try a file copy with the 5e later on today and see if that helps and then with a 6.

    I have another stupid though:
    Here I'm talking about speeds from PC to NAS, but what about file transfers WITHIN the NAS itself. Say I move a file from one folder on the NAS to another folder on the NAS, what should the througput be?
     
  29. dilidolo

    dilidolo Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    179
    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2011
    That is not true. A good quality CAT5 is good enough for gigabit. I have no problem to push over 900mb/s using CAT5.

    What CAT5 can't give you is keeping signal strength at 100m like CAT5e. But who is running 100M cable at home?

    Check how the cable is terminated.
     
  30. serpretetsky

    serpretetsky [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,684
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2008
    OP: you can also try to do some more elimination by setting up a decent computer as a windows share (since it seems like your using CIFS/SMB protocol) with a ramdisk and read and write to it to see if you get the same results.
     
  31. tangoseal

    tangoseal [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,108
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Wow something isnt right with my QNAP either..

    I can pull files from it at 121'ish MB/sec or about 99% gig speed.

    But ...

    I can only write to it at 10MB/sec lol..

    I just updated my firmware too.. It might have a bug in it ... shreeeeeeek

    Off to troubleshoot.
     
  32. night_2004

    night_2004 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,209
    Joined:
    May 31, 2007
    Coming from a TS-219P+ here...the NAS is limited in processing speed.

    Mine won't go above ~75MB/s read and ~40MB/s write in RAID1. If I use the same exact network configuration with the same hard drives in a DIY Linux NAS I saturate the GigE link. My results are in the same ballpark as QNAP's advertised specs but definitely lower. Latest firmware, 3' Cat6 cables, etc. I wouldn't be surprised if the performance numbers are results from a RAID0 arrangement.

    Your model is advertised to hit ~50MB/s read, ~25MB/s write. I'll bet they used RAID0 to come up with those specs as well, and RAID1-RAID5 would also suffer slower throughput.
     
  33. mwroobel

    mwroobel [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,909
    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    This is just not true. Standard Cat5 is rated at 100-200MHz. Before 5e was ratified, there was also "semienhanced" Cat5 350MHz certified (which is essentially 5e), that is what you might be talking about. But regular old Cat5 fails with serious errors after about 10 feet at gig speeds. Also, original Cat5 RJ-45 plugs had more near and far end crosstalk, which also created problems at gigE speeds. Also, gigE requires 4 pair where 10 and 100Base-T only require 2 pairs, some older Cat5 cables only had 2 pairs and forced 100Mbit speeds even if connected to gigE on both ends.
     
  34. feo

    feo Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    183
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    Quick update, no change using CAT5e instead of CAT5. Next ill try CAT6...
     
  35. hotcrandel

    hotcrandel Gawd

    Messages:
    781
    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    It won't make a difference.... those prebuilt NAS devices just don't have enough CPU to do parity or other calculations.
     
  36. night_2004

    night_2004 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,209
    Joined:
    May 31, 2007
    Yup. I have similar results in #32. If you want high throughput QNAP is not the answer.
     
  37. feo

    feo Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    183
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    Ok, for future reference, what is the answer? (I'm assuming its not one of these pre-built NAS boxes like Synology or QNAP)
     
  38. jwcalla

    jwcalla 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,629
    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Build your own. :)
     
  39. night_2004

    night_2004 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,209
    Joined:
    May 31, 2007
    Allow me to slightly adjust my statement. The low end QNAPs aren't the answer...I have zero experience with the more powerful enterprise racks. But yes DIY is the answer; my Linux box with an AMD x86 CPU running at 800MHz (BIOS lets me lock it down) can regularly hit 80MB/s-95MB/s on a GigE network with 5 drives in RAID6.
     
  40. faugusztin

    faugusztin 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,634
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2008
    HP Microserver N40L with a software raid (Linux/OpenMediaVault, FreeNAS, Windows Server). Or a hardware RAID card (the onboard RAID can only do RAID0 and 1). Or your own PC.