Recommended Posts

Alright! I just set up a basic FreeNAS box from old parts laying around my house. Setup was easy, and I am using it for data backup/share and a Time Machine for both of my macs.

 

I just have a few questions in regards to performance.

 

Specs are as follows:

AMD Phenom II X4 B50 | ASUS M4N98TD EVO (NFORCE 980a) | 4GB of ram | WD Blue 60GB HDD (OS Drive) | WD Red 3TB (Data)

 

Currently just one drive, I plan to get more when I get the coin. I have 2 different backups plus this so I'm not concerned about redundancy at the moment. I plan to consolidate in the near future and make the NAS my main backup. 

 

Networking hardware: (I know its basic, its all I can afford now. I'm a college student. :D)

Linksys E1000 Router | Motorola Modem | AT&T 3 mb/s | both computers are wired and right next to each other.

 

 

So questions:

 

1. When transferring data from Windows using CIFS, I get horrible transfer rates. Is there something I forgot to enable? Suggestions on what to check please. 

 

2. Time machine backups are slow. It took an hour to backup a fresh install (11gb) of data. Is that common? Are official time capsules that slow or is it my server? 

 

Thanks in advance! 

 

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1225331-freenas-questions/
Share on other sites

How slow is the transfer getting? What are the numbers?

 

The router is going to limit the speed you can transfer at, so even though the motherboard has gigabit ethernet, it won't be able to transfer at those speeds as the router is a 10/100.

 

What version of Windows are you using?

Makes sure to configure FreeNAS to use SMB2, SMB2.1, or SMB3. The SMB2 dialects have much better performance compared to SMB1 (although if you are on Windows XP you won't be able to take advantage of those performance improvements).

 

What version of OSX are you using? The most recent version switched over to their own custom implementation and the SMB2 client is incredibly buggy. Limiting the FreeNAS to SMB1 may even help performance.

 

Are you doing this over the LAN? Some quick calculations ((11*1024) / 1 / 60 / 60) gives me 3 MiB/s which is suspiciously close to your AT&T speed.

  On 11/08/2014 at 18:18, Lant said:

How slow is the transfer getting? What are the numbers?

 

The router is going to limit the speed you can transfer at, so even though the motherboard has gigabit ethernet, it won't be able to transfer at those speeds as the router is a 10/100.

 

What version of Windows are you using?

Makes sure to configure FreeNAS to use SMB2, SMB2.1, or SMB3. The SMB2 dialects have much better performance compared to SMB1 (although if you are on Windows XP you won't be able to take advantage of those performance improvements).

 

What version of OSX are you using? The most recent version switched over to their own custom implementation and the SMB2 client is incredibly buggy. Limiting the FreeNAS to SMB1 may even help performance.

 

Are you doing this over the LAN? Some quick calculations ((11*1024) / 1 / 60 / 60) gives me 3 MiB/s which is suspiciously close to your AT&T speed.

 

I'm using Windows 8.1.1 x64 and OS X 10.9 Mavricks and I'm getting about 10-11mb/s burst but goes as low as 1mb/s. Looks like my router is rated for fast ethernet (10/100). I will try to play around with protocols.

 

I am doing this on my local network (I think). I'm simply typing in \\-ipofserver- into file explorer. Is there a better way to do it?

your router/switch on the E1000 only has 10/100 connection. So your going to be limited to lets say 95mbps max (100) - you never actually see full wire speeds.

If you actually mean 10-11MBps then your about right at the max you can expect to see B is Bytes, b is bits..

1MB is a bit slow - but what are you moving lots of smaller files are few large ones?

freenas has iperf built in.. I would suggest you do some testing with this.

http://doc.freenas.org/index.php/Iperf

Speeds from this would give you max speed you could expect over the wire, not counting disk read/write speeds or overheads of the protocols being used. Here is the thing at 100mbps connection I don't think your going to notice the different between smb2 or smb3.. Yes smb3 has less overhead than 2, but your current bottle neck is your 100mbps connection.

You can buy a gig switch for peanuts these days.. Something like this should give you a drastic boost in your speed.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833156250

$19.99 with free shipping

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833704042

$18.99 with free shipping

Both have lots of reviews at 5 stars.. Connect it to your router port, then connect your devices to the gig switch and now what is your read write speeds. I see that MB you list ASUS M4N98TD EVO has gig nic, but do your windows and os x hardware have gig interfaces.. I would assume yes unless its some really budget or old hardware.

Here is iperf when connected at gig

post-14624-0-85669100-1407790662.png

Here hard coded it down to 100 -- moving files at this speed would be like watching paint dry.

post-14624-0-06211200-1407790701.png

  On 11/08/2014 at 20:20, BudMan said:

your router/switch on the E1000 only has 10/100 connection. So your going to be limited to lets say 95mbps max (100) - you never actually see full wire speeds.

If you actually mean 10-11MBps then your about right at the max you can expect to see B is Bytes, b is bits..

1MB is a bit slow - but what are you moving lots of smaller files are few large ones?

freenas has iperf built in.. I would suggest you do some testing with this.

http://doc.freenas.org/index.php/Iperf

Speeds from this would give you max speed you could expect over the wire, not counting disk read/write speeds or overheads of the protocols being used. Here is the thing at 100mbps connection I don't think your going to notice the different between smb2 or smb3.. Yes smb3 has less overhead than 2, but your current bottle neck is your 100mbps connection.

You can buy a gig switch for peanuts these days.. Something like this should give you a drastic boost in your speed.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833156250

$19.99 with free shipping

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833704042

$18.99 with free shipping

Both have lots of reviews at 5 stars.. Connect it to your router port, then connect your devices to the gig switch and now what is your read write speeds. I see that MB you list ASUS M4N98TD EVO has gig nic, but do your windows and os x hardware have gig interfaces.. I would assume yes unless its some really budget or old hardware.

 

Yeah I have a Crosshair Formula V-z on my Windows PC. My mac probably has gigabit as well. If I were to go gigabit what would my speeds more than likely be? 

see my above screenshots for iperf.. Here is a ropocopy of moving a file

post-14624-0-33474000-1407790938.png

I do see faster than that quite often..

Here is write

post-14624-0-75032200-1407791055.png

I don't always believe the dialog on the windows copy, and it does fluctuate, etc.. Here I grabbed something bigger so I had time to grab a screenshot

post-14624-0-18927400-1407791417.png

  On 12/08/2014 at 01:52, BudMan said:

You don't need a router - you just need a switch.. Sure your router can handle your "Motorola Modem | AT&T 3 mb/s" - what it can't handle is gig lan speeds..

 

Exactly. You cascade the router to the switch (one port on each), and the router still handles all the routing/IP/DNS/etc, but anything connected to only the switch will get the gigabit speeds. Generally gigabit switches are cheaper than routers, as they are 'dumb' and have no wifi and consume less power and usually come with 5-8 ports rather than the standard 4. I picked up a cheapie d-link for $30 at staples years back, when gigabit routers were still $80

I pointed out 2 gig switches that get great reviews for less than $20.. I doubt your picking up a gig router for anything close to that that is any good.

 

That being said if you were in the market for a GOOD switch, then I would suggest more like the SG300-10 from cisco - but your looking at $200 then which prob a bit steep for student ;)  So don't be surprised if you don't see 900Mbps on the cheap switches..  They are clearly not rated for 20Gbps switching like a higher end switch.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • I thought router has to have 6 Ghz band to be called wifi-7, guess I was wrong...
    • I have the Pixel 9 Pro XL...Unless this thing is "leaps and bounds" faster than the 9, I'll pass. And by leaps and bounds, I don't mean on benchmarks. "Real world" faster. Most people don't even come close to topping out the performance of their phones. Tensor G5 is Google's most powerful chip to date, boasting a staggering 36 percent performance leap over G4.
    • MIT's stunning 'bubble wrap' device squeezes water out from thin air even in deserts by Sayan Sen Image by Matteo Roman via Pexels Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) engineers have built a new kind of device that can pull clean drinking water straight out of the air—no electricity needed. It’s designed for areas where water is scarce and traditional sources like rivers or lakes aren’t reliable. Right now, more than 2.2 billion people globally don’t have access to safe drinking water. In the United States alone, 46 million face water insecurity, with either no running water or water that’s not safe to drink. This new device, called an Atmospheric Water Harvesting Window (AWHW), uses a unique hydrogel panel that looks like black bubble wrap. These dome-shaped bubbles soak up water vapor from the air, especially at night when humidity is higher. During the day, sunlight makes the vapor inside evaporate. That vapor then condenses on a glass surface and drips down through a tube, turning into drinkable water. The AWHW doesn’t rely on power sources like batteries or solar panels. It’s completely passive, meaning it works on its own. The team tested a meter-sized panel in Death Valley, California, one of the driest places in North America, and got between 57.0 and 161.5 milliliters of water per day even with humidity as low as 21 percent. That’s more than what other similar passive devices have managed. “We have built a meter-scale device that we hope to deploy in resource-limited regions, where even a solar cell is not very accessible,” said Xuanhe Zhao, a professor at MIT. “It’s a test of feasibility in scaling up this water harvesting technology. Now people can build it even larger, or make it into parallel panels, to supply drinking water to people and achieve real impact.” Another cool part of the design is how they kept the water safe to drink. Usually, these kinds of hydrogels use salts like lithium chloride to absorb more vapor but that can lead to salt leaking into the water, which isn’t ideal. To solve this, MIT’s team mixed in glycerol, a compound that helps keep salt locked inside the gel. In testing, the lithium ion concentration in the harvested water stayed below 0.06 ppm (parts per million), which is way below the safe limit. The hydrogel domes also give the material more surface area, letting it collect more vapor. The outer glass panel is coated with a special polymer film that helps cool the glass, making it easier for vapor to condense. “This is just a proof-of-concept design, and there are a lot of things we can optimize,” said lead author Chang Liu, now a professor at the National University of Singapore. “For instance, we could have a multipanel design. And we’re working on a next generation of the material to further improve its intrinsic properties.” Published in Nature Water, the study says the AWHW could last at least a year and shows promise for making safe, sustainable water in places with harsh climates. The researchers believe an array of vertical panels could one day supply water to individual households, especially in remote or off-grid locations. Source: MIT News, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • Clear Linux is open source, indeed, so its source code is available for anyone. They're just shutting down its support from them, they're not forbidding anyone else from taking over.
    • Linux Mint is also my favorite distro, but I fear what will happen with it if Clem were to disappear tomorrow, to be honest.
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      leoniDAM earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      Ian_ earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Ian_ earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Dedicated
      MacDaddyAz earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Explorer
      cekicen went up a rank
      Explorer
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      505
    2. 2
      ATLien_0
      209
    3. 3
      Michael Scrip
      202
    4. 4
      Xenon
      144
    5. 5
      +FloatingFatMan
      121
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!