This topic has been marked solved and closed to new posts due to inactivity. We hope you'll join the conversation by posting to an open topic or starting a new one.
Sorry for the delay. I had a 1TB folder with 1.2 million files that I needed to get off the server and onto my computer. It took 18 hours to copy down.
After it copied, I tested the speed of MTU=1500 vs MTU=8192. Virtually the same. So I went back to 1500.
I then copied a 1 GB file from Mac -> server. Time = 10 sec. I was fine with that.
Then 1GB file from server -> Mac. Also 10 seconds.
Then I created a 100 GB file and copied that.
Mac -> Server = 16:40 (minutes/seconds)
Server -> Mac = 16:48
It appears that the problem is NOT throughput, but rather, it seems that the problem is with directories and/or numbers of files. That's why it takes sooooo long to find the files to copy.
As I said, I'm running 2 drives with JBOD. Before that I had 4 drives with RAID 1 and it was slow.
but rather, it seems that the problem is with directories and/or numbers of files. That's why it takes sooooo long to find the files to copy.
Yes. To some degree this is inevitable. Transfering lots of small files will require a lot more seek time, and also it's less efficient on the network. But there might be some things that can be done to improve it.
Do you have strict sync enabled for the share? (that's specific to AFP). Look on the share settings wheel (Network Access->Advanced). If it is enabled, try disabling it, and doing another test of small file transfer (looks for something less time consuming than ~ 1 million files).
A more expensive solution is to get some SSDs and use ReadyTier.
As I said, I'm running 2 drives with JBOD. Before that I had 4 drives with RAID 1 and it was slow.
RAID-1 shouldn't be slower than JBOD. Writes are done in parallel. Reads also could be done in parallel (using both disk) - though I'm not sure if mdadm actually does that or not.
If you are interested in ReadyTier, probably the most robust approach would be to run RAID-1 with two mechanical disks, and use two SSDs in RAID-1 for metadata. You would need to keep on eye on wear-levels for the SSDs (since both would reach their write limit at the same time). That should substantially speed up small file transfers and directory browsing.
Do you have strict sync enabled for the share? (that's specific to AFP). Look on the share settings wheel (Network Access->Advanced). If it is enabled, try disabling it, and doing another test of small file transfer (looks for something less time consuming than ~ 1 million files).
No. I do not. Also, for Time Machine, when you set up a Time Machine share, it now sets it up automatically as an SMB share.
I looked into ReadyTier. Sounds interesting except 3 things... 1) I'm essentially going to lose 2 bays in my NAS to do this; 2) I'm going to have to purchase 2 2TB SSD's for this to work with my 2 12 TB mechanical drives (it appears that it takes 1 MB for metadata for every 8 GB of data and 3) until about 6 months ago, this NAS worked just fine.
I'd hate to spend the money on 2 2TB drives, just to find out that it is still just as slow.
I looked into ReadyTier. Sounds interesting except 3 things... 1) I'm essentially going to lose 2 bays in my NAS to do this; 2) I'm going to have to purchase 2 2TB SSD's for this to work with my 2 12 TB mechanical drives (it appears that it takes 1 MB for metadata for every 8 GB of data and 3) until about 6 months ago, this NAS worked just fine.
I mis-spoke here - strict sync is specific to SMB. It will kill performance for some applications.
I copied 58 GB to a share where I had strict sync turned off this a.m. I got 48 MBS for that copy. However, when you set up a Time Machine share, it doesn't give you the option of turning strict sync on or off.
Where did you find the rule of thumb on metadata?
I was using my own data for the ratio. Mine show 8.42 TB of data and 10.41 GB of metadata. Duh! You're right. I don't need nearly that much. A misplaced decimal point.
Will do. Just missed the cut off for same day Amazon shipping. So it won't be until tomorrow until I get them. But I've already changed the mechanical drives to RAID 0. Just need to add the other 2 drives when I get them.
I did install an SSD into my rack and set up ReadyTier (it took me a couple of days because I thought it required 1 SSD for each mechanical drive rather than for each volume). So that's now up and running. I started up a Time Machine backup and just aborted it after 5-1/2 hours it has written 188 GB of data and 200 MB of metadata (or about 9.5 MB/second). It took me 12 hours to backup the entire 8.8 TB of data to an attached storage RAID 1.
I started up a Time Machine backup and just aborted it after 5-1/2 hours it has written 188 GB of data and 200 MB of metadata (or about 9.5 MB/second). It took me 12 hours to backup the entire 8.8 TB of data to an attached storage RAID 1.
Did you test straight SMB transfers (folders with lots of small files)? Or just TM?
I did install an SSD into my rack and set up ReadyTier (it took me a couple of days because I thought it required 1 SSD for each mechanical drive rather than for each volume).
Normally you'd use 2 SSDs in RAID-1 for the metadata RAID group. That would give you redundancy if the drive fails.
However, using a single SSD shouldn't affect the speed much (if at all).
As a follow up, after 13 hours, it had only copied 22.5 GB to the SSD in the Rack. That rules out issues with the mechanical drives.
I then took the SSD out of the rack and put it into a USB3 adapter that I had and copied it directly. It copied all 180GB in 20 minutes. I guess the SSD was ok, too.
I've changed hard drives, cables, switches. It's slow with ALL of my computers, not just one. I've tried Jumbo Frames and normal size frames. I've tried with/without antivirus.
I have no idea where to look now.
I'm certainly running out of ideas.
One or two more though:
do you have file search enabled? If so, disable that.
If you are running the new audit feature in 6.10.0, then disable that too.
Keep strict sync off (and test with "vanilla" SMB, not TimeMachine). And use with the new SSD volume
Not sure if the Mac will connect to the NAS if you turn SMB transport encryption off. But if it will, try disabling that too.
Maybe also disable any services you aren't using (for instance NFS), and turn off all apps.
BTW, I've been assuming that you aren't using the volume encryption feature of the NAS. Is that correct?
I'm running a plain vanilla system. The only services running are SMB, UPnP, HTTP and HTTPS. Currently, I even have antivirus turned off.
File search is also off.
No apps are installed.
SMB3 Transport Encryption has 3 options -- Enable, Desired and Required. Right now it is Enabled.
So it's not
the load on the NAS (and even if it is encrypting the transport, it should be capable of faster speeds with small files).
the disks since you switched over to ssd
a volume issue, since the switch to ssd created a fresh volume
cabling, since you replaced that (and aren't seeing issues with ethernet errors)
your infrastructure, since direct connect gave the same performance
the mac itelf, since you've tried more than one PC.
Looking once more at network_settings.log, you still have ipv6 enabled. That can create performance issues with Windows (especially when ipv6 isn't enabled in the router). I don't know if that's also an issue with Macs - but you probably should disable ipv6.
After that, I am out of ideas on things to try. So if that also makes no difference, then perhaps see if @JohnCM_S or @Hopchen are willing to analyze your full log zip (they might possibly see something there).
If you are conversant with linux, you could log in with ssh, and see if top (or one of the other linux tools) gives you any clues on where the performance bottleneck is.
