I've been reading threads here regarding performance problems. I think I'm definitely there. My box is fully synched, and I just now started a copy, and it is moving files at 3.25MB/sec. That seems extremely slow to me. (BTW...I'm basing that on what Vista is reporting as the speed...).

 

I anticipate I will be getting teh Pro version, and implementation a Cache Drive.

 

But one question I have: I read about moving the parity drive off teh PCI bus. I have to show my ignorance and say, I have no idea now that would be accomplished. Can someone give me a  pointer on that?

 

Any thoughts appreciated.

 

What motherboard are you using. It's totally based on the architecture of the motherboard and the controllers built in or external.

Speed from Vista is horrible unless you apply SP1 to Vista. 

 

Are you running Vista SP1?

 

What kind of network hub/router are you using?  Is it a gigabit? or 100Mbit? 

Wired LAN, Or are you doing the copy over a wireless link?

Is the wiring old Cat-3, or Cat-5? or Cat-5e, or cat-6?

 

What is the hardware in your unRAID server?

          Motherboard?

          Network Card (if not built into the motherboard)

          Disk Controller(s)?

          Disks?

 

Please attach a syslog.  Some BIOS options put SATA hardware in legacy support mode, (read as Polled I/O emulated IDE) and almost anything would take forever.

 

How log did the full parity calculation take? (and how big is the biggest drive in your array)  Those will give us an idea of how fast the disks can be read and written

without even thinking of network traffic.

 

Joe L.

HI

 

I am running the following:

 

On teh PC I'm copying from.

Vista Utliamate with SP1

Gigabyte EP35C-DS34 MOBO

 

 

On the UnRaid:

Unraid 4.3

Abit 9 Pro Mobo.

Disks are Brand new 1TB Western Digitals: 3 of these

I have set the SATA to be AHCI mode

 

I'm not sure how long the parity calculation took. I let it run overnight and it was finished when I got up the next morning.

 

Since posting, over 10 min or so, my speed went up to close to 10MB/sec. But, then after 20-30 min or so, my drive went away and the copy aborted. This happened twice in a row now. I see in the log mention of the link beat being lost, and the link being up and down a bunch. Not quite sure what to think about that.

 

I just followed the troublshooting info on pulling a syslog and it will be attached below.

 

They hub is a DLINK DGS 2205, both Nics running at GB speed

The wiring is Cat 5, but has been installed for several years.

Wired lan

 

Thanks

 

 

Your onboard performance is very good, with a parity sync speed of 53.2MB/sec.  You are using the onboard SATA II ports, configured for and using AHCI, and don't have anything using a PCI card, so you are about as fast as you can get.

 

If that cable is truly Cat5, and not Cat5e, then that is probably the problem.  Cat 5 cable is fine for 10/100Mb/s Ethernet, but gigabit requires Cat5e or Cat6.  You are probably getting too many packet collisions for good net performance, and it may also explain the dropouts too.  The networking dropouts were the only real problem I saw in the syslog.  If you are going to replace the cable, I recommend Cat 6 for better future-proofing, only costs a bit more.

 

Try the ifconfig eth0 command at a console prompt, it will report some collision numbers and other statistics.

 

When reporting transfer speed, always mention the direction of transfer, because writes to the unRAID server are much slower than reads, if parity is being maintained.  You should be able to read close to 30MB/s or better from your server, writes to it will be a half to a third of that.

Hmmmm....this is interesting.

 

I'm doing a copy now from my PC to the UnRaid, and Vista is reporting like 500KB per second. I"m beginning to think it is reporting wrong. I may do some timeing.

 

I'm pretty sure the cable is just Cat 5. I put in in when  I built this house...12 years ago.

 

But, here is my stats from your suggested command:

 

root@Tower:~# ifconfig eth0

eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:50:8D:9C:99:35 

          inet addr:192.168.0.7  Bcast:192.168.0.255  Mask:255.255.255.0

          UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1

          RX packets:1976720 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0

          TX packets:1869651 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0

          collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000

          RX bytes:1405983826 (1.3 GiB)  TX bytes:1281119523 (1.1 GiB)

          Interrupt:17 Base address:0x2000

 

I"m doing a Properties on a set of directories now, and it is coming up with the counts real slow. I"m doing it to compary what was on my PC to what I attempted to copy. As a point of reference, there should be  4,170 folders with 56,780 files. I just starting timing that: 9:54:00, it was at 2800 folders; it's now been 1 minute, and it's countis up to 2910 folders.

 

I may try rebooting, as I just put the changes to the GO file referenced in other threads. Maybe that will make a difference.

 

[EDIT]

 

:o  ;D

 

Having just rebooted with those settings in the GO file, I am now copying and getting 19MB/Sec; dropping to 10MB now; now 3; now back to 11.7. Moving through different folders. And the count up on properties is going much faster too. And, no errors on the ETH.

 

Maybe it's performing like it should.

 

Thanks!

 

Cat5 in NOT sufficient for Gigabit Ethernet.  Regardless of whether you are seeing errors reported by the NIC.  Running GB on Cat5 is a guaranteed recipe for years of headaches and troubleshooting.

 

Get Cat5e or Cat6.

Yes, I know that. But my house is a split level, all enclosed walls, and rewiring is not an option.

 

Frankly, I"m not sure that GB is 'required' speeds. My needs are for video, and HD bandwidth requirements are under 20MB/sec. If I see trouble, I will drop the GB switch. I'm not seeing any data move faster than 20MB/sec on anything I've done, and the tests I've done have provided same throughput whether on 100 or GB here.

 

 

You can not get 20MB/sec on 100Mbit Ethernet.  Moreover, in a single collision domain, you will be hard pressed to reliably get 20Mbit/sec on 100 Mbit Ethernet.  20% of wireline speed is a typical max throughput in a single Ethernet collision domain.

 

I suggest you relocate the computers for testing and troubleshooting, and then move them back later.

OK.

 

I guess I'm confused. I thought the concept of a  switch was to prevent collisions, as opposed to a hub which does not.

 

Switches are store-and-forward devices with latency.. .they slow down traffic significantly.  A cut-through mode switch doesn't, but they propagate errors and are much more expensive.

 

Even without a switch and using a crossover cable, you can't get close to wireline speeds because of the way Ethernet works.  Now Token Ring, there was  much more efficient protocol.....