I am experiencing some performance issues with my NV+It is used for storing drive images created using the Acronis Drive Image 2010 CD. Backups work fine, the issue arises when I come to do a restore. It works well for 20 minutes or so with the hard disk light flashing rapidly, then Acronis starts to show an error saying that the backup source has "poor media quality". After clicking through the error many times, (I assume for retries) sometimes it will run normally again and then have other periods of freezing.I assumed it was perhaps an out of memory error so upgraded the memory to 512kB, which seems to have had a marginal improvement in performance, but no real change.What have I done to try and diagnose the problem ?Changed the network cablesRebooted the switch (Netgear GS108T)Changed the ports being used on the switch and connected the Readynas / laptop direct to the routerMy NV+ is running Radiator 4.1.7, has a static IP address and has 4 x Seagate ST32000641AS 2TB drives fitted running X-Raid. All disks are in good health.After struggling to restore a 21GB image yesterday I decided to drag out my old Synology DS101g NAS and try that. I copied the image file across the network using CIFS which took 37 minutes (about 9MB/s) and then did the restore from the Synology. That worked fine, it completed more rapidly than it would have done from the Readynas at full speed and I had just one media quality error. My conclusion from this is that the acronis file is fine, the network cabling is fine, it's the reading from the NV+ that's the problemUnscientifically, it seems that the NV+ is just bogging down due to memory issues, but I don't know that, which is why am here asking for help.More details of my setup followsStatic IPJumbo frames off (even though it still sends jumbo frames, changing the setting makes no difference to this problem) 1GB full duplex NICMTU 1500CIFS, NFS, FTP, HTTP, Rsync protocols tickedReadyDLNA onNASmonitor installed (shows minimal memory use with about 88% cache)Full journalling disabledFast CIFS writes onI know my firmware is a few versions out of date, but the more recent updates generally seem to be aimed at newer hardware / apple environments which aren't relevant for me.I have a secondary issue with both my NV+ and Duo RND2000 in that I can no longer use simply insert a USB stick and copy to the NAS using the backup button. The job always starts and then part way through copying large files it seems to eject the usb and then say it is no longer available ??. I should do another thread for this, but include for information here. Grateful for any thoughts ?

I think I would try upgrading the firmware. You can always downgrade again if there is a problem. I'd also check the OS fullness (requires ssh) or alternatively delete all logs from frontview (system and backup).Maybe also check the SMART stats for the disks.The NAS shouldn't be sending jumbo frames if the setting is off and the MTU set to 1500. So that is strange.

Have you considered updating the firmware?Don't think this will solve your problem, but probably advisable.You could also test all the disks using vendor tools, if doing this only remove and reinsert with Nas off.EDIT: didn't see last post from StephenB, my post doesn't add anything.

Thanks guys, some responses to your thoughtsStephenB wrote:I think I would try upgrading the firmware. You can always downgrade again if there is a problemI have been holding off upgrading the firmware as I thought 4.1.7 was stable and I didn't see much in the way of improvements for my type of use. I also didn't want to lose my logs (though I have now downloaded them for backup/examination). Certainly nothing that I have seen in the change logs to suggest that there are any fixes for this type of problem. I may still do so just to try StephenB wrote:The NAS shouldn't be sending jumbo frames if the setting is off and the MTU set to 1500. So that is strange.I helped a guy a couple of years ago by running some wireshark tests to look at the packets on my setup to see if we could replicate his problem. http://www.readynas.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=62414 . He was the brains, I was just the brawn. The conclusion was that the firmware sends large packets even when jumbo frames is off. :o I think you responded on that thread too StephenB wrote: I'd also check the OS fullness (requires ssh) or alternatively delete all logs from frontview (system and backup).Maybe also check the SMART stats for the disks.I have rechecked the SMART status. All drives look very good with no reallocated sectors or any unusual entries. I also used phpsysinfo to look at how much of the system partition is being used. It's only 24% used with 464 MiB from a 1.94GiB partition. The /dev/hdc1/ partition is mounted at / as ext3Looking at the information today I can see that the memory is now being reported as follows:Kernel 7%Buffers 13%Cached 17%Yesterday the cached memory was up at 88%, but I assume that was cached drive reads waiting to be transmitted.Disk swap is 0% today and was 1% yesterday if I recall correctly.Does that help, is there anything else I can be looking at ?

Have you asked acronis about this?I appreciate that it seems to work almost error free from another source, but the "poor media quality " error seems to be fairly common with Acronis.

When I have a chance I might do my own wireshark trace with my nv+ v1.I've done restores with Acronis TrueImage with no problems, but that was from my pro-6. Maybe use NasTester (http://www.808.dk/?code-csharp-nas-performance) to test the read speeds of both the DS106j and the nv+

NV+ slows after 15-20 minutes [SOLVED]

30 Replies

Replies have been turned off for this discussion

937carrera
Aspirant
Mar 05, 2014
I have downgraded to 4.1.6 and have it's still not working :(

No shares available, though the NAS does appear in the workgroup
No option for Share Mode Security

I understand from more reading around that the option disappears when you perform a factory reset in v4.x firmware, so now I need to find a download for v3.x firmware.

edit: found one, but got an error that the firmware was invalid and read one of Yoh-Dahs old posts that said that once you have upgraded to v4 you cannot go back (block size issue ?). It's looking like my final option is to clone from my existing duo
StephenB
Guru - Experienced User
Mar 05, 2014
My NV+ still shows share mode, and it never ran 3.x firmware. Maybe try a factory reset with 4.1.6, and see if it comes back. Though if you are using 2 TB drives, I would do the reset after installing 4.1.7 - as you need that to get 4K alignment with 2TB drives.

For XP you can alternatively try entering the NAS credentials into the user account control panel app. That should work, and avoid the need to go crazy getting share mode back.

For backup, the truncation apparently only happened with CIFS. If you are backing up to another NAS, NFS would be a faster choice.
937carrera
Aspirant
Mar 05, 2014
I have finally got to the bottom of my connectivity issue to the new Duo. After lots of research, removing the HDD and deleting the partition table through testdisk and network troubleshooting it turns out that it was a restriction in the IP range in my Zonealarm configuration that caused the problem :oops: I have no idea why I placed it there.

So, now I'm back on track with testing again :)

937carrera

Aspirant

Mar 06, 2014

I have run some tests on the new Duo. It is noticeably quicker than my NV+ and I successfully restored a 21MB archive in about 30 minutes on firmware 4.1.6

I have moved onto 4.1.7 and am running that restore again, all seems to be progressing well. My plan was to move the Duo onto 4.1.13 and then repeqat the upgrade path on the NV+

Having drunk too much coffee I decided to just work my way through all the logs and see if there was anything that couold be of interest. I have posted my partition.log below; it looks to me as though one of my 2TB hard disks has lost its partition table. I presume that will wreak havoc with internal processes as the NV+ tried to pull data from a disk with no partition, then it has to go to another part of the raid array to get the data.

Does this make sense, and what's the best way to recreate the partition structure on the problem disk. Do I simply hot remove and replace and let it rebuild the RAID array, or is there a better method / command that reduces the risk of data loss (I have 3.0TB used from 5.4TB available from 4 x 2TB drives.

I assume hde corresponds to disk 2, second from the left ?

Disk /dev/hde doesn't contain a valid partition table

Disk /dev/hdc: 2000.3 GB, 2000388448256 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 243200 cylinders, total 3907008688 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000

   Device Boot      Start         End      Blocks   Id  System
/dev/hdc1              32     4096031     2048000   83  Linux
Partition 1 does not end on cylinder boundary.
/dev/hdc2         4096032     4608031      256000   82  Linux swap / Solaris
Partition 2 does not end on cylinder boundary.
/dev/hdc3         4608032  3907008687  1951200328    5  Extended
/dev/hdc5         4608040   156280863    75836412   8e  Linux LVM
/dev/hdc6       156280872  3906992311  1875355720   8e  Linux LVM

Disk /dev/hde: 2000.3 GB, 2000388448256 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 243200 cylinders, total 3907008688 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000


Disk /dev/hdg: 2000.3 GB, 2000388448256 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 243200 cylinders, total 3907008688 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000

   Device Boot      Start         End      Blocks   Id  System
/dev/hdg1              32     4096031     2048000   83  Linux
Partition 1 does not end on cylinder boundary.
/dev/hdg2         4096032     4608031      256000   82  Linux swap / Solaris
Partition 2 does not end on cylinder boundary.
/dev/hdg3         4608032  3907008687  1951200328    5  Extended
/dev/hdg5         4608040  3906992303  1951192132   8e  Linux LVM

Disk /dev/hdi: 2000.3 GB, 2000388448256 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 243200 cylinders, total 3907008688 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000

   Device Boot      Start         End      Blocks   Id  System
/dev/hdi1              32     4096031     2048000   83  Linux
Partition 1 does not end on cylinder boundary.
/dev/hdi2         4096032     4608031      256000   82  Linux swap / Solaris
Partition 2 does not end on cylinder boundary.
/dev/hdi3         4608032  3907008687  1951200328    5  Extended
/dev/hdi5         4608040  3906992303  1951192132   8e  Linux LVM

and an extract from system.log

Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: VERSION/ID    : SB=(V:0.1.0) ID=<a2015108.00000000.00000000.00000000> CT:4f7b94f2
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: RAID_INFO     : DISKS(TOTAL:4 RAID:4 PARITY:1 ONL:4 WRK:4 FAILED:0 SPARE:0 BASE:0)
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel:                 SZ:3907008688 UT:00000000 STATE:0 LUNS:2 EXTCMD:1 LSZ:3907008686
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: LOGICAL_DRIVE : 0: B:0000000032 E:0004096000 R:1 O:1 I:1:000000000 DM:f
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: LOGICAL_DRIVE : 1: B:0004096032 E:3902912686 R:4 O:1 I:1:000000000 DM:f
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: PHYSICAL_DRIVE: 0: DISK<N:0/1,hdc(22,0),ID:0,PT:1,SZ:3907008688,ST: B:online>
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: PHYSICAL_DRIVE: 1: DISK<N:1/2,hde(33,0),ID:1,PT:1,SZ:3907008688,ST:P :online>
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: PHYSICAL_DRIVE: 2: DISK<N:2/3,hdg(34,0),ID:2,PT:1,SZ:3907008688,ST:  :online>
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: PHYSICAL_DRIVE: 3: DISK<N:3/4,hdi(56,0),ID:3,PT:1,SZ:3907008688,ST:  :online>
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: CURRENT_DRIVE : DISK<N:0/1,XXX(22,0),ID:0,PT:1,SZ:3907008688,ST: B:online>
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: Need to do drives searching.
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: Find p d at 1, chn 1
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: Total=4; raid=4; ready=0; work=4; failed=0
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: Check degraded mode, start_pos=1
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: No drive missing, X_RAID run in opt mode.
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: Change X_RAID running mode from 0 to 1
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: ::::Update backup SB.
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: X_RAID: recovery thread got woken up ...
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: New = 1, source drives = f, current/active=4/4
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: :<6> hdc: hdc1 hdc2 hdc3 < hdc5 hdc6 >
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: :<6> hde: unknown partition table
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: :<6> hdg: hdg1 hdg2 hdg3 < hdg5 >
Mar  6 17:25:58 RND4000 kernel: :<6> hdi: hdi1 hdi2 hdi3 < hdi5 >

Indexmill
Aspirant
Mar 06, 2014
Hi,

My name is John. I am NOT trying to hijack this post so, please feel free to ask me to leave... But, I hope we can work together.

I have a ReadyNAS DUO with two 2TB WD Red drives AND I am using Acronis Tru Image to backup the partitions on my PC to the NAS once per week using a scheduled backup scheme. The total size of the backup is 300 MB. I have told Acronis to save two backups.

The backup starts and runs fine for many hours. Then, right at the end, it crashes with a " share not available" error. Perhaps it happens when it tries to delete the older backup in order to respect the " save two versions" setting. I don't know.

It is very frustrating. Any ideas? Thank you, John.
937carrera
Aspirant
Mar 07, 2014
John,

I know how frustrating these problems can be. It's probably better if you start your own thread, I'll happily try & contribute there
937carrera
Aspirant
Mar 10, 2014
Right, time for a little update.

I pulled disk 2 and did a hot swap so that the Raid would rebuild itself. The resyc took 8 hours and was uneventful, with the end result being that disk 2 still had no partition table. After a bit more reading around I still don't understand X-Raid properly, but it seems that one of the disks is the parity disk and that disk has no partition table. In other words this is normal, but it isn't always disk 2.

I tried to restore the Acronis backup this evening, still on 4.1.7. It failed as before and at the same point with poor media quality errors.

I then bit the bullet and jumped straight to 4.1.13 firmware. I'm delighted to say that the restore went through perfectly in just 23 minutes and it was clear within 10 seconds that the NV+ was much more responsive. Sometimes those firmware updates really do work :D

I also ran NAStester again. This time the NV+ gave 33.37GB/s read speed and 13.95GB/s write speed which compares to 21.14GB/s read and 16.64GB/s write speed on the duo

Many thanks for all the help and comments posted, I'll go back and change the title of the thread to Solved.

I'm still left with a couple of questions, further comments and thoughts much appreciated

1. Is there somewhere which explains how X-Raid works
2. As my NV+ used to work perfectly with 4.1.7, what happened to make it not work correctly (and is the current good performance simply due to "fresh" firmware which may degrade over time)
StephenB
Guru - Experienced User
Mar 10, 2014
I agree there is some mystery on why the performance dropped off, and why upgrading to 4.1.13 fixed it when the other reinstalls you tried did not.

XRAID uses standard raid underneath. In the specific case of the v1 (Sparc) systems, the underlying RAID uses a dedicated parity disk. That disk has no data partition. That mode of RAID is sometimes called RAID-4 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_R ... els#RAID_4), though here we usually call single redundancy with more than 2 drives "RAID-5" on all platforms.

That parity disk is normally the disk in the highest slot number at the factory reset. Though if you have moved disks around, you might have accidentally put in in a different position.

The newer NAS distribute the parity blocks across all the disks (which is certainly RAID-5).
937carrera
Aspirant
Mar 11, 2014
That's great, knowing X-Raid is like Raid 4 helps me understand the logs and configuration of my disks. They are configured as expected because when I got my 4 drives I installed disk 1 first to make sure the NAS worked, then disk 2 and then decided as it took so long to rebuild the array that I cold booted with disks 3 and 4 to save time. At least that's what I think I did.

The messing around with the other versions of firmware was all done on my second Duo. This was primarily done so that I was sure that I could upgrade / downgrade firmware without issue, and much of the firmware updating was down to me trying, unsuccessfully, to get Share Mode security available. What I learned from this process was that 4.1.6, 4.1.7 and 4.1.13 seem solid and reliable. Like some other users I found that 4.1.10 a bit slow & flakey.

Having done the testing on the Duo I was confident that a move to 4.1.13 on the NV+ would be the right thing to do. I now have to get some drives for the spare Duo so I can use that as a backup for my backup :)
StephenB
Guru - Experienced User
Mar 11, 2014
937carrera wrote:
...That's great, knowing X-Raid is like Raid 4...
XRAID just adds the expansion capability, and is layered on top of various standard RAID modes. With the sparc products, that RAID mode is RAID-4, on the newer products it is RAID-1, RAID-5, or RAID-6.

Forum Discussion

NV+ slows after 15-20 minutes [SOLVED]

30 Replies

Related Content

SOLVED: Slow wireless internet passthrough speed after firmware update

Orbi RBR50 Why is speed so variable minute to minute?

Nighthawk XR1000 SLOW....SLOW...SLOW...!!!!!!!

SOLVED: ReadyNAS Backups of new Windows 11 PC

R7000P very slow to serve internet, timeouts with just one real user -- solved?

NETGEAR Academy

ProSupport for Business