Reply
Topic Options
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
Post your performance results
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-09-25
08:29 PM
2006-09-25
08:29 PM
Post your performance results
I thought it might be interesting to see what kind of performance everyone is getting with IO Meter so that we can compare what we're getting. So I thought we could all post our results in this thread for easy comparison.
You can run IO Meter by following the steps here: http://www.infrant.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=265
Please post your hardware specs, other relevant info, and IO Meter results. Maybe this could get stickied? Or ignored if no one cares 🙂
-------
Here's my info:
Stock NV
4 x Seagate ST3250823AS 250gb Hard Disk in X-RAID
All journaling disabled
Fast writes on
Intel D805 2.66ghz dual core cpu
Intel D945GNTLKR motherboard with onboard Intel Gigabit NIC
2 gigs ram
Seagate ST3250824AS 250gb Hard Disk
Windows Vista x86 RC1 (if that makes a difference)
Dell PowerConnect 2708 Gigabit switch (no jumbo frames)
Cat 6 cabling
IO Meter Write: 19.321793 MBps
IO Meter Read: 26.803979 MBps
You can run IO Meter by following the steps here: http://www.infrant.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=265
Please post your hardware specs, other relevant info, and IO Meter results. Maybe this could get stickied? Or ignored if no one cares 🙂
-------
Here's my info:
Stock NV
4 x Seagate ST3250823AS 250gb Hard Disk in X-RAID
All journaling disabled
Fast writes on
Intel D805 2.66ghz dual core cpu
Intel D945GNTLKR motherboard with onboard Intel Gigabit NIC
2 gigs ram
Seagate ST3250824AS 250gb Hard Disk
Windows Vista x86 RC1 (if that makes a difference)
Dell PowerConnect 2708 Gigabit switch (no jumbo frames)
Cat 6 cabling
IO Meter Write: 19.321793 MBps
IO Meter Read: 26.803979 MBps
Message 1 of 309
Labels:
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-09-25
09:13 PM
2006-09-25
09:13 PM
Re: Post your performance results
Great idea. You've been stickied 😎
Message 2 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-09-26
12:25 AM
2006-09-26
12:25 AM
Re: Post your performance results
Hi,
here are my results...
--------------- 1GB direct connection -----------------
- read 40 mb/s
- write 34 mb/s
--------------- 100MB router connection ----------------
- read 16 mb/s
- write 16 mb/s
--------------- 11MB wireless connection --------
- read 3 mb/s
- write 3-4 mb/s
Connection from laptop:
IBM thinkpad, Intel Pentium 1.8Ghrz, 1gb ram
wired: Broadcom NetXtreme Gigabit Ethernet
wireless: Intel(R) PRO/Wireless 2915ABG Network Connection
Router:
3COM OfficeConnect
Greetz
BtV
Ps. All utp cables are brand new
Ps. All utp cables are not lying besides electrical cables, this would also slow down speed a lot
here are my results...
--------------- 1GB direct connection -----------------
- read 40 mb/s
- write 34 mb/s
--------------- 100MB router connection ----------------
- read 16 mb/s
- write 16 mb/s
--------------- 11MB wireless connection --------
- read 3 mb/s
- write 3-4 mb/s
Connection from laptop:
IBM thinkpad, Intel Pentium 1.8Ghrz, 1gb ram
wired: Broadcom NetXtreme Gigabit Ethernet
wireless: Intel(R) PRO/Wireless 2915ABG Network Connection
Router:
3COM OfficeConnect
Greetz
BtV
Ps. All utp cables are brand new
Ps. All utp cables are not lying besides electrical cables, this would also slow down speed a lot
Message 3 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-09-26
07:37 AM
2006-09-26
07:37 AM
Re: Post your performance results
btv wrote: Hi,
here are my results...
--------------- 1GB direct connection -----------------
- read 40 mb/s
- write 34 mb/s
--------------- 100MB router connection ----------------
- read 16 mb/s
- write 16 mb/s
16MB/s over 100mbit ethernet? I think there's some caching behavior at work...
-brendan
Message 4 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-09-26
09:46 AM
2006-09-26
09:46 AM
Re: Post your performance results
ReasyNAS NV with single 750GB drive. UPS, journaling off, cache on, etc.
Netgear 100mbit router/switch
PC: Nvidia motherboard/gigabit NIC, 1 GB RAM, Athlon
Read: 8.3 MB/sec
Write: 9.5 MB/sec
Netgear 100mbit router/switch
PC: Nvidia motherboard/gigabit NIC, 1 GB RAM, Athlon
Read: 8.3 MB/sec
Write: 9.5 MB/sec
Message 5 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-01
07:22 PM
2006-10-01
07:22 PM
Perf results
I am seeing some pretty strong results...makes me wonder if I missed something in the Iometer setup instructions, but I've triple checked them. I've done 6 runs now and see:
Writes: 35 or 56 MBps (half the time it is 35, half 56)
Reads: 33, 47, and 72 MBps (of my 6 runs I've got two at each of these)
Everything on the ReadyNAS is setup per the instructions on the forum. I am only sharing as CIFS. No SMB and no HTTP.
The network switch is a SMCGS8
My PC is an ASUS A8N-E, Athlon X2 3800+, 2 GB RAM, onboard gig ethernet (Nvidia)
Do you guys see consistent results from one run to the next?
Writes: 35 or 56 MBps (half the time it is 35, half 56)
Reads: 33, 47, and 72 MBps (of my 6 runs I've got two at each of these)
Everything on the ReadyNAS is setup per the instructions on the forum. I am only sharing as CIFS. No SMB and no HTTP.
The network switch is a SMCGS8
My PC is an ASUS A8N-E, Athlon X2 3800+, 2 GB RAM, onboard gig ethernet (Nvidia)
Do you guys see consistent results from one run to the next?
Message 6 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-01
07:27 PM
2006-10-01
07:27 PM
Re: Post your performance results
Yes my results are always pretty much the same for multiple runs. In the thread where it explains how to use IO Meter, I think there's a file that you can download that has all the right settings for a test. All you have to do is pick the drive you have mapped.
Message 7 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-01
07:51 PM
2006-10-01
07:51 PM
Re: Perf results
patja wrote: I am seeing some pretty strong results...makes me wonder if I missed something in the Iometer setup instructions, but I've triple checked them. I've done 6 runs now and see:
Writes: 35 or 56 MBps (half the time it is 35, half 56)
Reads: 33, 47, and 72 MBps (of my 6 runs I've got two at each of these)
Everything on the ReadyNAS is setup per the instructions on the forum. I am only sharing as CIFS. No SMB and no HTTP.
The network switch is a SMCGS8
My PC is an ASUS A8N-E, Athlon X2 3800+, 2 GB RAM, onboard gig ethernet (Nvidia)
Do you guys see consistent results from one run to the next?
As much as I'd like to want to believe the ReadyNAS is that fast, I think it might have to do more with caching on the PC side as you have 2GB of memory. If you use a larger test data size with IOMeter, you'll probably get a more consistent result.
Message 8 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-01
09:19 PM
2006-10-01
09:19 PM
Re: Perf results
As much as I'd like to want to believe the ReadyNAS is that fast, I think it might have to do more with caching on the PC side as you have 2GB of memory. If you use a larger test data size with IOMeter, you'll probably get a more consistent result.
That makes sense. I increased the maximum disk size to 4096000 and am now getting reads of 47 MBps and writes of 42 MBps pretty consistently.
Message 9 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-01
11:48 PM
2006-10-01
11:48 PM
Re: Perf results
patja wrote:
As much as I'd like to want to believe the ReadyNAS is that fast, I think it might have to do more with caching on the PC side as you have 2GB of memory. If you use a larger test data size with IOMeter, you'll probably get a more consistent result.
That makes sense. I increased the maximum disk size to 4096000 and am now getting reads of 47 MBps and writes of 42 MBps pretty consistently.
I believe that's sector count, so you may even want to double that size.
Message 10 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-02
09:12 AM
2006-10-02
09:12 AM
Re: Perf results
yoh-dah wrote:
patja wrote:
As much as I'd like to want to believe the ReadyNAS is that fast, I think it might have to do more with caching on the PC side as you have 2GB of memory. If you use a larger test data size with IOMeter, you'll probably get a more consistent result.
That makes sense. I increased the maximum disk size to 4096000 and am now getting reads of 47 MBps and writes of 42 MBps pretty consistently.
I believe that's sector count, so you may even want to double that size.
I doubled it to 8192000 and am seeing writes at 53 - 55 and reads consistently at 47. I am using the iometer.icf file posted on the Iometer thread, just changing the target to my mapped drive and increasing the max disk size sectors.
Message 11 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-02
10:36 AM
2006-10-02
10:36 AM
Re: Perf results
patja wrote:
yoh-dah wrote:
patja wrote:
As much as I'd like to want to believe the ReadyNAS is that fast, I think it might have to do more with caching on the PC side as you have 2GB of memory. If you use a larger test data size with IOMeter, you'll probably get a more consistent result.
That makes sense. I increased the maximum disk size to 4096000 and am now getting reads of 47 MBps and writes of 42 MBps pretty consistently.
I believe that's sector count, so you may even want to double that size.
I doubled it to 8192000 and am seeing writes at 53 - 55 and reads consistently at 47. I am using the iometer.icf file posted on the Iometer thread, just changing the target to my mapped drive and increasing the max disk size sectors.
I guess we'll need to confiscate your PC for our benchmark lab 😎 Actually other test you can do is to drag & drop a large file, i.e. 4GB or larger, and time that.
Message 12 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-03
03:27 PM
2006-10-03
03:27 PM
Re: Post your performance results
My results running RAIDiator™ v3.00c1-p2 [1.00a025] from a 3.2Ghz Athlon 64 PC with 1GB RAM via gigabit connection on a Netgear GS108 switch to my ReadyNAS NV.
4 x WDC WD2000JS 200GB drives in X-Raid.
Settings (all standard I believe):
Enable disk write cache: Enabled
Disable full data journaling: Enabled
Disable journaling: Disabled
Enable jumbo frames: Disabled
Optimise for OS X: Disabled
Enable fast CIFS writes: Enabled
Enable fast USB disk writes: Disabled
Network shows 0 errors.
Write MBps = 15.71
Read MBps = 25.03
I've previously run tests with direct connection with similar results, and jumbo frames enabled (at both ends) with a reduction in results.
Personally I think it does the job and looks great, but I would expect better throughput (how can read performance over four drives give worse performance than native read performance of a single drive? I understand there is a write penalty with Raid 5).
4 x WDC WD2000JS 200GB drives in X-Raid.
Settings (all standard I believe):
Enable disk write cache: Enabled
Disable full data journaling: Enabled
Disable journaling: Disabled
Enable jumbo frames: Disabled
Optimise for OS X: Disabled
Enable fast CIFS writes: Enabled
Enable fast USB disk writes: Disabled
Network shows 0 errors.
Write MBps = 15.71
Read MBps = 25.03
I've previously run tests with direct connection with similar results, and jumbo frames enabled (at both ends) with a reduction in results.
Personally I think it does the job and looks great, but I would expect better throughput (how can read performance over four drives give worse performance than native read performance of a single drive? I understand there is a write penalty with Raid 5).
Message 13 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-03
05:35 PM
2006-10-03
05:35 PM
Re: Post your performance results
limp wrote: Personally I think it does the job and looks great, but I would expect better throughput (how can read performance over four drives give worse performance than native read performance of a single drive? I understand there is a write penalty with Raid 5).
Network stack and file protocol overhead?
Message 14 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-05
03:35 PM
2006-10-05
03:35 PM
Re: Perf results
patja wrote:
yoh-dah wrote:
patja wrote:
As much as I'd like to want to believe the ReadyNAS is that fast, I think it might have to do more with caching on the PC side as you have 2GB of memory. If you use a larger test data size with IOMeter, you'll probably get a more consistent result.
That makes sense. I increased the maximum disk size to 4096000 and am now getting reads of 47 MBps and writes of 42 MBps pretty consistently.
I believe that's sector count, so you may even want to double that size.
I doubled it to 8192000 and am seeing writes at 53 - 55 and reads consistently at 47. I am using the iometer.icf file posted on the Iometer thread, just changing the target to my mapped drive and increasing the max disk size sectors.
These speeds are extremely quick! Gb speed caps at 125MB/sec assuming everything is perfect. And we all know that it is never perfect.
When I get everything setup I'll have a Linksys SRW2008 switch which has a 16Gb non-blocking backplane so this won't be the bottleneck. I have an Asus A8V motherboard with a Marvell Gb nic. I have an AMD 3500+ and 2GB Memory. If I don't get good throughput, I may upgrade my NIC. I bought 2 Seagate 250GB ES drives to go with my NV.
Message 15 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-11
04:21 PM
2006-10-11
04:21 PM
Re: Post your performance results
I did some performance tests last night.
Specs:
ReadynasNV - 256MB w/ 2 Seagate ES 250GB drives
PC Asus A8V - AMD 3500+ with 2GB Memory
PC NIC - Yukon Marvell 10/100/1000 (supports jumbo frames)
With a Linksys WRT54G and everything connected at 100/full I get:
Read: 9.28MB/s
Write: 8.54MB/s
With my new Linksys SRW2008(8 port Gb switch w/ full 16Gb backplane non-blocking - supports jumbo frames) and everything connnected at 1000/full)
Read: 29.x MB/s
Write: 18.x MB/s
I tried to enable jumbo frames on my NIC, the NV and the switch bbut something went wrong so I have no results with jumbo frames enabled. I hope to have that issue resolved soon and I will post back here.
Added 10/12/2006:
I fnally got jumbo frames working and my write scores improved dramatically, but my read scores dropped a tad.
With Jumbo Frames enabled on my PC, switch and NV:
Read: 27.52
Write: 23.75
Specs:
ReadynasNV - 256MB w/ 2 Seagate ES 250GB drives
PC Asus A8V - AMD 3500+ with 2GB Memory
PC NIC - Yukon Marvell 10/100/1000 (supports jumbo frames)
With a Linksys WRT54G and everything connected at 100/full I get:
Read: 9.28MB/s
Write: 8.54MB/s
With my new Linksys SRW2008(8 port Gb switch w/ full 16Gb backplane non-blocking - supports jumbo frames) and everything connnected at 1000/full)
Read: 29.x MB/s
Write: 18.x MB/s
I tried to enable jumbo frames on my NIC, the NV and the switch bbut something went wrong so I have no results with jumbo frames enabled. I hope to have that issue resolved soon and I will post back here.
Added 10/12/2006:
I fnally got jumbo frames working and my write scores improved dramatically, but my read scores dropped a tad.
With Jumbo Frames enabled on my PC, switch and NV:
Read: 27.52
Write: 23.75
Message 16 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-11
09:47 PM
2006-10-11
09:47 PM
Re: Post your performance results
zamboni wrote: ReasyNAS NV with single 750GB drive. UPS, journaling off, cache on, etc.
Read: 8.3 MB/sec
Write: 9.5 MB/sec
New SMC-GS5 gigabit (jumbo) switch. No jumbo frames.
Read: 15.32
Write: 16.02
NVIDIA motherboard based LAN to:
1) Optimize for throughput, not CPU utilization
2) Jumbo frames
3) Auto-negotiate to 1000-mbit full duplex.
Rebooted both NAS (enabled Jumbo) and PC. Ensured no apps or services running on the PC.
IO Meter Run #1
Read: 19.69 - CPU 27%
Write: 20.22 - CPU 10.32%
IO Meter Run #2 -- different CPU-switch cable (switch-NAS is Infrant cable)
Read: 18.88 - CPU 17.62%
Write: 22.01 - CPU 8.94%
Message 17 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-11
10:39 PM
2006-10-11
10:39 PM
Re: Post your performance results
zamboni wrote:
zamboni wrote: ReasyNAS NV with single 750GB drive. UPS, journaling off, cache on, etc.
Read: 8.3 MB/sec
Write: 9.5 MB/sec
New SMC-GS5 gigabit (jumbo) switch. No jumbo frames.
Dreadful.
Read: 15.32
Write: 16.02
OK, so I increase my switch 10x, but my performance goes up a meagre 50%? I understand that jumbo frames will help write, but read is in the toilet... it is operating at a theoretical 122 MBit -- not 1000 MBit.
Note, this is after rebooting and disabling Antivirus, and every program and service running. Before this "clean reboot:"
Read: 14.68
(so, my NAV, with Outlook replicating every minute, my read was only 0.64 mbit worse)
Yeah, I may try a direct connection cable, but at this point, I am vastly disappointed; I expect better than 0.12 GBit performance out of a gigabit device... I may try a separate GBit NIC, but my "as-is" PC can natively do better with other GBit personal computers on a gbit network...
Definitely you should eliminate the switch first with direct connect. Most likely it is something like auto negotation failed. I highly recommend to manually set your speed/duplex on each device. This is a very common and overlooked problem.
Message 18 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-11
11:22 PM
2006-10-11
11:22 PM
Re: Post your performance results
conversation moved to: http://www.infrant.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=38101
Message 19 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-11
11:44 PM
2006-10-11
11:44 PM
Re: Post your performance results
Did you set the speed/duplex on the PC, NAS, and Switch? You must set it manually on all 3. Also, please list your specs of your PC. Do you see any errors on the Network/Ethernet screen when you click "show errors"? If so, post them here.
Message 20 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-11
11:56 PM
2006-10-11
11:56 PM
Re: Post your performance results
Well crap, I just realized the NV doesn't have the option to manually set 1000Mb. I have 10 or 100/half & 10 or 100/full and then auto negotiation. So forget what I said about manually setting speed/duplex on the NV. I just found out my nic card is the same way, yet my switch can do it.
Message 21 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-12
11:51 AM
2006-10-12
11:51 AM
Re: Post your performance results
Conversation moved to: http://www.infrant.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=38101
Message 22 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-12
12:07 PM
2006-10-12
12:07 PM
Re: Post your performance results
Zamboni, you should create a new topic. This thread should be reserved just for posting user results so folks can easily skim to see if what they're seeing is the result of similar setups.
Message 23 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-12
08:14 PM
2006-10-12
08:14 PM
Re: Post your performance results
yoh-dah wrote: This thread should be reserved just for posting user results so folks can easily skim to see if what they're seeing is the result of similar setups.
True - it started as just results, as I did not expect errors. I have now created a new thread with the relevant info from here. please delete my edited-empty posts and the replies to clean it up!
Message 24 of 309
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2006-10-14
09:04 PM
2006-10-14
09:04 PM
Re: Post your performance results
Adding my bit...
Using the recommended settings outlined in the performance post on this forum.
Write MBps: 19.452
Read MBps: 30.759
Here's my setup:
Stock NV
1 x 500GB (NORAID)
All journaling disabled
Fast writes on
AMD64 4800+
A8N32-SLI using the Marvell onboard NIC
2 gigs ram
2 x WD Raptors (RAID0+1)
Windows Vista x86 RC2
Netgear GS608 Gigabit switch (no jumbo frames)
Cat 5e cabling
Using the recommended settings outlined in the performance post on this forum.
Write MBps: 19.452
Read MBps: 30.759
Here's my setup:
Stock NV
1 x 500GB (NORAID)
All journaling disabled
Fast writes on
AMD64 4800+
A8N32-SLI using the Marvell onboard NIC
2 gigs ram
2 x WD Raptors (RAID0+1)
Windows Vista x86 RC2
Netgear GS608 Gigabit switch (no jumbo frames)
Cat 5e cabling
Message 25 of 309