December 5, 200916 yr Currently i'm transfering files to the server at 11 MB/s, since i have to transfer +/- 7 TB this is taking quit some time. I don't have a cache drive but i'm thinking of buying a gigabit router. However the cables in my house are cat 5 wich i can't replace for cat 5e/6, so my question is: will buying a gigabit router improve my speeds when using cat 5 cables? Normally i would just try it, but gigabit routers aren't the cheapest. So i would like to hear your thoughts about this.
December 5, 200916 yr Currently i'm transfering files to the server at 11 MB/s, since i have to transfer +/- 7 TB this is taking quit some time. I don't have a cache drive but i'm thinking of buying a gigabit router. However the cables in my house are cat 5 wich i can't replace for cat 5e/6, so my question is: will buying a gigabit router improve my speeds when using cat 5 cables? Normally i would just try it, but gigabit routers aren't the cheapest. So i would like to hear your thoughts about this. It might work... only way to know for sure is to give it a try. But instead of a gigabit router, consider a gigabit switch. Many of us use a Gigabit switch and then connect it to the slower 100Mbit router that in turn connects to the outside world. Gigabit switches are far less expensive. I have the 8-port version of this "Gigabit switch" on my lLAN http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833122140&cm_re=switch-_-33-122-140-_-Product My 100Mbit wireless router is connected to the cable modem connected to the outside world. One LAN port on it is connect to my Gigabit switch. (When I got it, it was on sale for about $39.) The other ports on the Gigabit switch connect to other PC's with Gigbit network interfaces. Another possibility, if you can locate the unRAID server next to the PC with the existing data is to connect them directly to each other with no switch or router, but just a cable between the two network ports. You would need to assign them fixed IP addresses, but then you could transfer the bulk of the files with very little added expense, and once loaded, re-locate the server to its permanent location. Joe L.
December 5, 200916 yr You dont say how long your runs are? For a cheap test simply wire your two Gb devices together (Gb will autoneg no x over needed). If you used good quality cat5 cable and the run isnt too long (15M) you might be ok. A switch might improve on this but a couple of good Gb intel nics might well work directly linked and will only cost the price of the Nics.
December 5, 200916 yr Author You dont say how long your runs are? For a cheap test simply wire your two Gb devices together (Gb will autoneg no x over needed). If you used good quality cat5 cable and the run isnt too long (15M) you might be ok. A switch might improve on this but a couple of good Gb intel nics might well work directly linked and will only cost the price of the Nics. I don't know how long the exact cables are, but i think longer than 15M since it's a 3 level house. But what you're saying is: connect the windows pc directly to the server? If so, how does it work, will i still see the shares/disks in my network locations? Joe L. I will just buy a gigabit switch then and try. However i've always thought that i would need a gigabit router to, but it seems that: modem>100mbit router>gigabit switch will give me gigabit even though the switch is connected to the 100mbit router.
December 6, 200916 yr [i don't know how long the exact cables are, but i think longer than 15M since it's a 3 level house. But what you're saying is: connect the windows pc directly to the server? If so, how does it work, will i still see the shares/disks in my network locations? /quote] It'll let you know if the cat5 will GB speed without buying a Gb router, and it'll let you copy your 7TB of data much faster. If you can get a Gb link working directly, I'd do as Joe suggested and buy a Gb switch. You'll need Gb nics in those devices you want to run Gb (anything that uploads to UnRaid).
December 6, 200916 yr Author Thanks for the reply's, i will first test wether it's such an improvemed by connecting the server straight to the windows pc with cat 5 and then buy a gigabit switch Edit: Didn't work, it said 1gbps connection but limited or no connection available. So i switched back but now i can't log in to the server //tower. Ifconfig is ok. I tried rebooting the server, pc, powered off the router, but nothing helped...
December 6, 200916 yr You forgot to assign IP addresses. When you direct connect there's no one to assign numbers to things. (DHCP if you want to look it up) The limited/no connectivity message is windows way of saying "I couldn't find someone to give me a number". Does anyone have a link to a good description of how to do this for Joey? Right now everything I write would be rambling and distracted.
December 6, 200916 yr Author You forgot to assign IP addresses. When you direct connect there's no one to assign numbers to things. (DHCP if you want to look it up) The limited/no connectivity message is windows way of saying "I couldn't find someone to give me a number". Does anyone have a link to a good description of how to do this for Joey? Right now everything I write would be rambling and distracted. Well that makes sense, allthough i still don't know how do to this, so a good description like you told would be appreciated, however my first priority is to getting connected to the server again. I just can't connect to //tower anymore. My network locations is also saying something like: can't find the network path. I've read wiki and troubleshooting but don't have any idea how to solve this. Btw i really like this community, everyone is supportive and all, so thanks for that.
December 7, 200916 yr It'll take a while for your machines to re-find the dhcp server and name resolution to start working again...give it 5-10 mins and retry. Set your server up from the web UI, settings menu. At a command prompt (cmd.exe) on your client machine type ipconfig, it'll tell you your ip address. Modify your unraid server to a higher or lower number or something you are likely to remember like 10 and less than 254. This number should not be in your routers dhcp range (most start around 50-80 now a days): If your IP is 192.1168.1.100 your server should be changed to 192.168.1.10 in its network settings. Choose no for DHCP. From the cmd prompt type ping 192.168.1.10 You should get reply from 192.168.1.10: bytes = 32 time <1ms TTL=64 (assuming you chose 192.168.1.10) If you do you can re-try your direct link. To get to your flash drive or server I always use the ip address: \\192.168.1.10\flash or http:\\192.168.1.10 or \\192.168.1.10\"user_share_name" or \\192.168.1.10\disk1 To setup a manual IP goto \\192.168.1.10\flash\config\network.cfg My contents look like this # Generated settings: USE_DHCP=no IPADDR=192.168.1.10 NETMASK=255.255.255.0 GATEWAY=192.168.1.254 HWADDR=00:03:47:6B:63:5C DHCP_KEEPRESOLV=no DNS_SERVER1=192.168.1.254 DNS_SERVER2= DNS_SERVER3= You need to setup your client in the same network range as well. In my above example my network is 192.168.1.x My client machine is 192.168.1.65. My server is 192.168.1.10 My DHCP server serves the range 192.168.1.100-200 Using \\tower\blah convention assumes something on the network knows 'tower'='server ip address', which it will after a short while but not straight away. You router will gather all this information and pass it around or reply to requests for this information. With just two machines on the network each of them must know the others name for such names to work on each host. In the directly linked situation, this wont happen so you have to specify the ip addresses and paths or write them into your hosts file ( under windows c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts). tower 192.168.1.101
December 7, 200916 yr Author It'll take a while for your machines to re-find the dhcp server and name resolution to start working again...give it 5-10 mins and retry. Set your server up from the web UI, settings menu. At a command prompt (cmd.exe) on your client machine type ipconfig, it'll tell you your ip address. Modify your unraid server to a higher or lower number or something you are likely to remember like 10 and less than 254. This number should not be in your routers dhcp range (most start around 50-80 now a days): If your IP is 192.1168.1.100 your server should be changed to 192.168.1.10 in its network settings. Choose no for DHCP. From the cmd prompt type ping 192.168.1.10 You should get reply from 192.168.1.10: bytes = 32 time <1ms TTL=64 (assuming you chose 192.168.1.10) If you do you can re-try your direct link. To get to your flash drive or server I always use the ip address: \\192.168.1.10\flash or http:\\192.168.1.10 or \\192.168.1.10\"user_share_name" or \\192.168.1.10\disk1 To setup a manual IP goto \\192.168.1.10\flash\config\network.cfg My contents look like this # Generated settings: USE_DHCP=no IPADDR=192.168.1.10 NETMASK=255.255.255.0 GATEWAY=192.168.1.254 HWADDR=00:03:47:6B:63:5C DHCP_KEEPRESOLV=no DNS_SERVER1=192.168.1.254 DNS_SERVER2= DNS_SERVER3= You need to setup your client in the same network range as well. In my above example my network is 192.168.1.x My client machine is 192.168.1.65. My server is 192.168.1.10 My DHCP server serves the range 192.168.1.100-200 Using \\tower\blah convention assumes something on the network knows 'tower'='server ip address', which it will after a short while but not straight away. You router will gather all this information and pass it around or reply to requests for this information. With just two machines on the network each of them must know the others name for such names to work on each host. In the directly linked situation, this wont happen so you have to specify the ip addresses and paths or write them into your hosts file ( under windows c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts). tower 192.168.1.101 Thank you very much for this manual, i think this is well worthy for the wiki pages. Here's what i did though: bought some cat5e Belin 10 and 15 meter cables and a gigabit switch, took me some hours to rewire everything but now i have 1 gbps. The average transfer speed is now 16 MB/s. Sometimes it goes up to +/- 30 MB/s for a sec. or it goes down to 10 MB/s. I don't know what the cause of that is, maybe the external esata device is the one to blame, tomorrow i will see if transfering a file from my internal hdd will go better. ps. i'm transferring file with TeraCopy and the esata device (sharkoon pro esata).
December 7, 200916 yr If you are not using the lastest beta13 version of unRAID, which will probably be announced as 4.5-final shortly, you might consider upgrading. The network performance has been greatly improved, and it will certainly help with your migration. Find it here: http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=4813.0 Upgrade only involves coping two files from the un-zipped distribution to your flash drive. (Three files if you want the newer version of "memtest" too) Joe L.
December 7, 200916 yr Author If you are not using the lastest beta13 version of unRAID, which will probably be announced as 4.5-final shortly, you might consider upgrading. The network performance has been greatly improved, and it will certainly help with your migration. Find it here: http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=4813.0 Upgrade only involves coping two files from the un-zipped distribution to your flash drive. (Three files if you want the newer version of "memtest" too) Joe L. Wow upgrading from b11 to b13 really made a difference! Now it's at least 35 MB/s, thanks this is gonna save me some time
December 7, 200916 yr Upgrade only involves coping two files from the un-zipped distribution to your flash drive. (Three files if you want the newer version of "memtest" too) Joe, Which 2 files are you referring? bzimage & bzroot ?
December 7, 200916 yr Upgrade only involves coping two files from the un-zipped distribution to your flash drive. (Three files if you want the newer version of "memtest" too) Joe, Which 2 files are you referring? bzimage & bzroot ? yes, you'll need to reboot too...
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.