Share faster without cache drive

[jgourd]

When I use the cache drive on a share I get 10MB/S write speeds to the share. If I turn off the cache drive for the share I get 31MB/S write speeds.

 

When using the cache drive the webGUI is very slow to respond. When not using it, the webGUI is OK.

 

The cache drive is a OCZ-VERTEX2 SSD. I am running 5b12.

 

Thanks

[opentoe]

There goes that logic with using a fast cache drive will improve your write performance. Unfortunately you won't get anything solid as feedback since you are running a beta version. Good luck. Just got home from a night out and my friend's Syn1511+ was writing at 149MB/sec while we were pumping down 2 blu-ray movies. I couldn't believe the performance on that thing but there is always a price to pay.

[prostuff1]

There goes that logic with using a fast cache drive will improve your write performance.

That is not true.

 

Unfortunately you won't get anything solid as feedback since you are running a beta version. Good luck.

That is also not true

 

Just got home from a night out and my friend's Syn1511+ was writing at 149MB/sec while we were pumping down 2 blu-ray movies. I couldn't believe the performance on that thing but there is always a price to pay.

That is nice, but you also fail to mention that the Syno NAS is probably running a RAID5 which will ALWAYS be faster then unRAID for read/write.  It is the nature of the beast and you fail to mention that expanding that Syno NAS with more drives later is going to be a right pain in the arse because it is a RAID5.

 

 

 

 

Now, back to the users question/post:

Please post a syslog!

Please post all hardware specs!

Please restart the unRAID machine and let us if that shows any improvement!

[Johnm]

Just my 2 cents.. Something sounds wrong here.

somewhere you have a bottleneck.

 

I am running SSD's as cache drives.

 

I have a Mushkin 128GB (Sata2 sandforce on a saslp-mv8, not the motherboard) on one unraid box. i can write to it at about 95MB/s (even while the mover is running) and can read at 99% GiB network speed.

I also have an OCZ Solid3 (Sata3 Sandforce on motherboard SATA3) on my other unraid box that can Read and Write at 99% of the GiB network speed. even while the mover is running.

 

 

@opentoe:

you are trying to compare a hammer to a wrench. they are different tools for different jobs.

unRAID is for low impact mass storage while using low electricity on low cost consumer hardware with mismatched drives while keeping parity for a drive failure.

a dedicated Hardware RAID box is meant to run on specific hardware (usually with a very large price tag) using matched drives and can consume lots of electricity for high performance.

 

The glory of unraid is that you do not have 20 drives spinning to watch one movie or view one photo. that power consumption adds up fast. (this is improved even more with "Cache_DIRs" add-on)

 

By that nature alone, unraid will be much slower while preserving parity. but for what it does, it is probably the only NAS like OS to do that. Making it unique.

Most other "low impact" type solutions copy the data over unprotected then mirror the data to a second drive when idol or on a timer.

 

to agree you about performance...

Personally I run tiered storage, high performance RAID arrays and unraid arrays.

Some of my data goes to a hardware RAID then backed up or moved to unRAID. Some data goes straight to unraid. it depends on the Data. Movies for example go straight to unRAID.

 

Both are handy tools for they job they perform and the price bracket they fall into

 

**i will note, you can make a really fast, protected, multi-tier unraid by using a hardware raid for the cache drive. Thus combining the best of both in one box.

[jgourd]

Syslog attached. It is a new fast AMD system with 4 gigs RAM.

Syslog.txt

[prostuff1]

Syslog attached. It is a new fast AMD system with 4 gigs RAM.

Thanks for the syslog!

 

Those "specs" you listed above tell me almost nothing besides the fact that you have 4GB of ram and a new AMD processor.

 

We need full system specs please.

[jgourd]

Motherboard:  http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128511

CPU: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103957

SATA card for the most recent four drives added: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816103105

Cache Drive:  http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227550

Parity and Disk1-3:  http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822152245

 

 

If there is a system profiler I can run from the UnRAID box tell me how to run it.

[Johnm]

More info....

 

What unraid version, what is your cache drive connected to, are you using the realtek 8111e that is on the system or something else?

[jgourd]

The RealTek NIC on the motherboard is what I connect to the network with. The SSD is connected to the lone 1.5Mb connector on the mobo. Everything else is 3Mb/s SATA.

[prostuff1]

The RealTek NIC on the motherboard is what I connect to the network with. The SSD is connected to the lone 1.5Mb connector on the mobo. Everything else is 3Mb/s SATA.

 

What version of unRAID?  if not the newest either 4.7 or 5.0b13 I suggest updating to one of those.

[jgourd]

5b12 is what I stated at the start of this thread.

[bcbgboy13]

The OP runs his MB with the first revision BIOS. There are two newer versions and perhaps even a beta somewhere in the Gigabyte support forums...

 

The people ought to understand that in the Windows world a newly released motherboard, chipset, CPU, platform probably will work trouble-free in most of the circumstances.

 

In the Unraid world this is not the case as the development and testing stretches quite a bit - from Linux kernel to slackware to Unraid and the early adopters may hit a problem here and there...

 

So be prepared to be that test animal and watch regularly your motherboard vendor, SSD vendor, SATA card(s) vendor for newer firmware and BIOSes that max fix some of the problems.