I'm pretty sure TLER doesn't matter in a NAS as it's software RAID anyway.
Are you able to factory default with the new OS on your new disks as a test? As far as I know upgrading from EXT4 to BTFS is unpredictable. If you can start as BTFS from the get go it should be more reliable.
I'm pretty sure TLER doesn't matter in a NAS as it's software RAID anyway...
AFAIK software raid controller vs hardware raid controller doesn't really matter. If the response to a read or write request takes too long, because the drive is busy reallocating a sector, or retrying a read request, then there will be problems maintaining the RAID array as a whole with reasonable performance.
Exactly, a drive with TLER will drop out of any RAID array. Been there, got the T-shirt. I'm not sure what the spinny magnetic disk industry have been doing for the last 10 years, other than cramming more bits on the disk. There's no 12 platter drives, drive with multiple heads/platter, anything innovative. Best was the hybrid Momentus drives that were quickly superceded....
Now that you can easily saturate SATA with a SSD array, one wonders if spin tech is dead... Or maybe now they'll start doing some serious R&D!
I don't think that is stoppable myself. Though it isn't clear when that trend starts to affect network storage. I'm thinking we are still quite a way from affordable 4-5 TB SSD.
I am not convinced that RAID makes a lot of sense for SSD - they fail in different ways from traditional disks, and my guess is that the array is even more likely to see near-simultaneous failures.
RAID for SSDs makes no sense at all in it's current sense; but storage strategies implementing multiple SSDs do. SATA3 makes no sense at alll, we need a step change. Increased IOPs and throughput with the right interfaces. Spinning storage currently has limitations from physics; in less than 5 years it will be dead unless something happens; too much power, too little storage, too much money.
Remember history repeats itself: the floppy disk....?
RAID for SSDs makes no sense at all in it's current sense; but storage strategies implementing multiple SSDs do...
I agree completely. Even in an SSD world, there's a need to have your file system span multiple drives, and also to be able to recover data when disks fail. But current RAID isn't the answer.
ihartley wrote:
Spinning storage currently has limitations from physics..
I wouldn't count spinning storage out yet, we have 5 TB drives apparently coming out this year. And consumer-grade SSD has its issues also (in addition to the price).
ihartley wrote:
...Remember history repeats itself: the floppy disk...
I'd happily let spinning storage go, when some better comes along. It's been quite a while since I needed to dust off my floppy drive, and I certainly don't miss it. 😄
I have a Ultra 4 Plus and with 4.2.22 I had read/write speeds close to 100 MB/s with 4xWD20EARS (Green). I have now replaced those with 4xWD40EFRX (Red) and updated to 4.2.24, I'm noticing a small performance decrease. I'm now seeing speeds in the 75-80MB/s range. I don't know if it's the new firmware or the disks. According to various storage reviews that I have read the Red's are suppose to be a little bit faster. In any event that's not why I'm posting.
Due to Debian Etch being an old OS I'm no longer able to use certain Debian Etch repositories, which lead me to think that it might be worth trying ReadyNAS OS6. What's your take on it so far besides the performance decrease? Is it "worth" upgrading?
With vertical expansion (assuming you replaced the disks one by one) you would have an additional RAID layer which would probably mean some performance hit.
You could backup your data and try ReadyNAS OS. If you don't like it you could downgrade again (I can supply an image to downgrade, and this would also require a factory default).
No I created a new volume from scratch but I just remembered that haven't gone through the optimization guide yet (was quite some time I ago I setup the NAS originally).
If you could provide me with the downgrade that would be awesome. I have my data backed up. I'm just in the transition of restoring but I think I'd like to try out OS 6. Etch is EoL and is just causing me problems in terms of working with the CLI. I'm already doing unsupported stuff so what the heck. 🙂
You're not alone, hando. I just upgraded my Ultra 4 to OS 6.1.9. With OS 4 I could obtain 60-80 MBps on writes of very large files. With OS 6, I'm barely getting 25-30 MBps. XRAID. I turned off Checksum copying and Antivirus checking. I haven't made any other software or hardware changes. Weird.
30 - 50 MB/s is write speed with smb and a Linux client.
The read speed with a Mac OS X client and afp is at a very good 100+ MB/s. The write speed with Mac and afp is higher too. So it is probalby a SAMBA or Linux issue.
Anti Virus and snapshots are turned off with just the new ( OS 6.2.0 beta ) bitrot protection.
Thank you for the tip. Yes. Tried it with bitrot protection and without it and with deactivated checksum on the volume. But there was no difference. Maybe it is Linux and/or SAMBA issue.
But again if the system runs stable for now it will be probably ok.
Another possibility is that especially as 6.2 is a beta there could be some performance issues for certain use cases that might be resolved in a future beta.
Can you create a new share with the checksum, bit-rot and snapshots all disabled from the start and see if performance is any different?
Ok. So a new share with: disabled checksum, bitrot protection and snapshots the write speed with smb on a Linux client is: 25 - 49 MB/s the read speed is: 55 MB/s
the write speed with afp on a Mac OS X client is 50 - 90 MB/s the read speed 70 - 100 MB/s
It's a ReadyNAS Pro Pioneer 6x 3TB XRAID2 and Gbit LAN.
So it definitely sounds like it is related to SMB and the Linux client.
Have you tested e.g. NFS performance with Linux?
If you get the UID and GID of a user on your Linux PC to match that of one on the NAS you may find that using NFS provides much better performance for accessing the NAS from your Linux client.
Thanks for the tip. No haven't tried NFS, but will do so in the future.
Another question: The ReadyNAS Pro Prioneer Edition runs with a 1.80 GHz, 800 MHz FSB C2D Intel CPU. Is the Intel E6750 2.66 GHz, 1333 MHz FSB C2D compatible with this NAS? http://ark.intel.com/de/products/30784/ ... 33-MHz-FSB
