Lan Performance

[Buszek]

Welcome

I have a question regarding performance FreeNAS

My platform is
D510MO Intel (Intel Atom 1.6)
Ram 4 GB
Red WD 2TB HDD 1TB Samsung
Cisco Gigabit Switch

The WD Drive UFS file system and then transfer satisfactory about 50Mb / s

Disk 1TB Samsung ZFS (I use the UFS but unfortunately niedziałają then plugins) and unfortunately there is only a transfer of 10Mb / s

I read a lot of descriptions and some say 4GB ram is sufficient to support ZFS.
Please help on ZFS settings to improve performance

Thanks in advance for any tips

P.S
Sorry for poor spelling

 

[enemy85]

CIFS transfer?
I guess the poor speed depends both on low RAM and low CPU speed (1.6ghz).
I have more or less same situation with Amd e350, 4GB RAM and 2x2Tb drives and i can only reach 10-12MB/s

 

[Buszek]

CIFS transfer?
I guess the poor speed depends both on low RAM and low CPU speed (1.6ghz).
I have more or less same situation with Amd e350, 4GB RAM and 2x2Tb drives and i can only reach 10-12MB/s

Thx enemy85

Thanks for the reply.

Yes, of course, CIFS

RAM capacity unless there is a problem here because the DDR2 used on another platform is about from what you write but the weak point is the processor.
I did not realize that the ZFS file system has until such requirements.
It took to me with UFS RAID you can not get it to do because unfortunately the system plugin only works on ZFS. And on your NAS I have a lot of large files and frequent transfer at a speed of 10Mb / s is not acceptable. So far, so I get tired. But ultimately I'm interested in the mirror and performance over 30Mb / s, and extensions offered by plugins. If, however, there will be a good solution to this, unfortunately, forced to bend to migrate to a different system.

 

[cyberjock]

Well, having less than the 8GB that is recommended from the manual kills performance.

Also using "Green" CPUs like the Intel Atom and e350 also kills performance.

If you want more speed, consider both of those as "required" to get good performance.

You really set yourself back buying that hardware(or reusing it). Please read the stickies in the hardware section of the forum and the FreeNAS manual and you'll have a better understanding of what kind of hardware is appropriate for your situation.

 

[Buszek]

Well, having less than the 8GB that is recommended from the manual kills performance.

Also using "Green" CPUs like the Intel Atom and e350 also kills performance.

If you want more speed, consider both of those as "required" to get good performance.

You really set yourself back buying that hardware(or reusing it). Please read the stickies in the hardware section of the forum and the FreeNAS manual and you'll have a better understanding of what kind of hardware is appropriate for your situation.

Thanks and you Cyberjoke for answer. I was waiting for her. Your comments are very professional. I've read many threads you have posted.

Unfortunately, my motherboard does not support more RAM. Processor and not subject to replacement. I bought the equipment consciously. I care that was quiet and low energy consumption.
I read the manual but I am new and not all four things are for me to understand.
Initial tests encourage the use FreeNAS. I probably would have everything completed successfully if not the need to use ZFS for action plugins. In the meantime, I've done tests on 4GB Ram but with powerful processor and obtained performance 45MB / s You can see for my needs 4GB of Ram would be ok but with a more powerful processor.

 

[gpsguy]

As you've seen UFS doesn't have the RAM overhead that ZFS needs.

If you had a little more RAM, say 6Gb, my guess is that you'd see performance back in the 40's. With just 4Gb of RAM, caching is disabled. From the manual, "ZFS disables pre-fetching (caching) for systems containing less than 4 GB of usable RAM. Not using pre-fetching can really slow down performance"

I realize your motherboard that 4Gb is the maximum you can put on your motherboard. Unfortunately, I don't have a silver bullet that will solve your problem, without replacing your motherboard.

 

[vegaman]

Repurpose that board as a pfsense box and upgrade your NAS hardware. That's the only thing that will really make a difference to your performance I think.

 

[joeschmuck]

I don't know why the developers placed a restriction like having ZFS as the file system to load plugins since UFS worked fine in the past. I suspect they want to get us to a single file system.

To the OP, I would suggest trying NAS4FREE, it doesn't look the same as FreeNAS but it works and you may get better throughput but your Atom processor it really a limitation for you.

 

[Buszek]

I don't know why the developers placed a restriction like having ZFS as the file system to load plugins since UFS worked fine in the past. I suspect they want to get us to a single file system.

To the OP, I would suggest trying NAS4FREE, it doesn't look the same as FreeNAS but it works and you may get better throughput but your Atom processor it really a limitation for you.

With "gpsguy" for drawing attention to the impact they have on the performance of memory ZFS. But at this point, the biggest problem seems to me the lack of support plugins are using UFS on what rightly points out that "joeschmuck" I know the Atom system will speed demon (my NAS I use at home is not in the company), but it was enough that I was not gdybm forced to use ZFS, which can significantly reduce performance. Meanwhile Nas4Free tests. And it seems that it will be able to meet my requirements. So Raid on UFS and offered a few additions have been built plugins. Thanks again for your suggestions and advice that ziększyły my knowledge of the system and the requirements and dependencies. Maybe one day live to see the FreeNAS Plugins for UFS.

 

[cyberjock]

Maybe one day live to see the FreeNAS Plugins for UFS.

Not likely. iXsystems has already discussed removing UFS in a future FreeNAS build because so few people use it and they are trying to downsize the code they use. Not sure if/when. But if you start talking about it, that usually means it is coming down the pipe.

 

[anika200]

Well, having less than the 8GB that is recommended from the manual kills performance.

Also using "Green" CPUs like the Intel Atom and e350 also kills performance.

If you want more speed, consider both of those as "required" to get good performance.

You really set yourself back buying that hardware(or reusing it). Please read the stickies in the hardware section of the forum and the FreeNAS manual and you'll have a better understanding of what kind of hardware is appropriate for your situation.

Your post brings up a few points I have seen posted before and just for counter point:

I have gotten better bandwidth on my local network when the server had 4GB ram and now I have 8GB. So I have not seen any performance difference with ram amounts except throughput was down after I bumped it up to 8GB.

I rarely ever exceed 25% of my old Intel Core 2 7500 so I really do not think that a faster/newer cpu will make a big difference in performance.

I changed to all Intel ethernet cards on my machines here (3 total) and the transfer rate between my linux/bsd boxes actually went down. I still have to track this down and fix it, hopefully this is just some config problem or other.

I think my bigger point is there are many different scenarios for network speed degradation and it is not always the answer to point at cpu/ram/disk/filesystem.

 

[cyberjock]

Ｙｏｕ　ａｒｅ　ｒｉｇｈｔ．　　Ｂｕｔ　ｉｆ　ｙｏｕ　ａｒｅ　ｇｏｉｎｇ　ｔｏ　ｃｒｅａｔｅ　ａ　ｔｈｒｅａｄ　ｗｉｔｈ　ｈａｒｄｗａｒｅ　ｔｈａｔ　ｉｓ　ａｌｒｅａｄｙ　ｌｅｓｓ　ｔｈａｎ　ｔｈｅ　ｍｉｎｉｍｕｍｓ　ｒｅｑｕｉｒｅｄ　ａｎｄ　ｉｓｎ＇ｔ　ｅｖｅｎ　ｉｎ　ｔｈｅ　ｒｅａｌｍ　ｏｆ　ｗｈａｔ　ｉｓ　ｒｅｃｏｍｍｅｎｄｅｄ，　ｅｘｐｅｃｔ　ｐｅｏｐｌｅ　ｔｏ　ｐｏｉｎｔ　ｉｔ　ｏｕｔ　ａｎｄ　ｎｏｔ　ｂｅ　ｐａｒｔｉｃｕｌａｒｌｙ　ｉｎｔｅｒｅｓｔｅｄ　ｉｎ　ｈｅｌｐｉｎｇ　ｗｈｉｌｅ　ｙｏｕ　ｗｏｎ＇ｔ　ｂｕｙ　ｔｈｅ　ａｐｐｒｏｐｒｉａｔｅ　ｈａｒｄｗａｒｅ．

Ｉ＇ｍ　ｎｏｔ　ｓｕｒｅ　ｈｏｗ　ｂｉｇ　ｙｏｕｒ　ｐｏｏｌ　ｉｓ，　ｂｕｔ　ｐｒｅｆｅｔｃｈ　ｉｓ　ｄｉｓａｂｌｅｄ　ｂｙ　ｄｅｆａｕｌｔ　ｔｏ　ｌｏｗｅｒ　ｔｈｅ　ｓｔｒａｉｎ　ｏｎ　ｓｙｓｔｅｍｓ　ｗｉｔｈ　ｌｉｍｉｔｅｄ　ＲＡＭ．　　Ａｓ　ｓｏｏｎ　ａｓ　ｙｏｕ　ｗｅｎｔ　ｏｖｅｒ　４ＧＢ　ｔｏ　８ＧＢ　ｔｈａｔ　ｗａｓ　ｅｎａｂｌｅｄ　ｂｙ　ｄｅｆａｕｌｔ．　　Ｉｆ　ｙｏｕ　＂ｓｈｏｕｌｄ“　ｈａｖｅ　１６ＧＢ　ｏｆ　ＲＡＭ　ｂｅｃａｕｓｅ　ｙｏｕ　ｈａｖｅ　ａ　ｐｏｏｌ　ｔｈａｔ　ｉｓ　ｒｏｕｇｈｌｙ　１６ＧＢ　ｔｈｅｎ　ｙｅｓ．　Performance may actually suck worse.

Another example。。。 plenty of people use an l2arc as a substitute for not enough RAM. It actually strains your system more because the l2arc index must be stored in RAM.

There's lots of other reasons and ways that you can add more hardware and see performance decrease. But I don't see why its unreasonable to expect someone to expect you to try to use appropriate hardware before you ask for help from the forum.

People would laugh at me if I showed up with a Pentium III and complained that its too slow. They have, and its for good reason.

If you show up and complain that your wifi is slow we'll laugh at you over that too. Ｉｔ＇ｓ　ｓｌｏｗ　ｂｙ　ｄｅｓｉｇｎ．　　Ｔｈｅｒｅ＇ｓ　ｎｏ　ｆｉｘｉｎｇ　ｔｈａｔ．

Ｓｏｒｒｙ　ａｂｏｕｔ　ｔｈｅ　ｆｏｎｔｓ．　　Ｔｈｅｙ　ｃｈａｎｇｅ　ｒａｎｄｏｍｌｙ　ｏｎ　ｍｅ　ｎｏｗ　ａｎｄ　Ｉ　ｃａｎ＇ｔ　ｆｉｘ　ｉｔ．　Go figure...