Poor write and read Performance, even with cache drive

[Max Koch]

Hello,

I just build my first unraid Server and I'm having trouble getting the Performance I have hoped for.

I'm Running:

2 WD Reds 2tb for the Array

1 WD Red 4tb for the parity

and 1 Samsung ssd (250gb evo)

 

note: all drives are connected via sata directly onto the motherboard

I'm using 2x4gb of ddr3 (dual-channel) and an i5 2500

I've built the system correctly (it posts, so yeah...) and was able to get unraid 6.4.1 running

 

After starting the array and letting the parity process finish I started testing:

Problems:

-It takes a while to start the copying to the NAS and from the NAS (about 2-3 seconds)

-I'm not able to do a Benchmark with "Blackmagic disk test" (The NAS will be only used by Mac users.Thats why I activated "AFP". Potential Problem?)

-I have terrible read and write speeds, although I only use wifi, I expected higher speeds (speeds are around 2 Mb per second, both read and write)(I have activated cache usage for all shares

 

The setup and everything else worked like a charm

 

I'll say "Thank you" in advance and hope someone can help me.

 

-M. Koch

 

[trurl]

10 minutes ago, Max Koch said:

It takes a while to start the copying to the NAS and from the NAS (about 2-3 seconds)

unRAID will spin down any disks not in use after a specified time. When you first access a spun down disk it may take a few seconds to spin up.

 

11 minutes ago, Max Koch said:

I'm not able to do a Benchmark with "Blackmagic disk test" (The NAS will be only used by Mac users.Thats why I activated "AFP". Potential Problem?)

Unless you have a specific use that requires AFP it is probably better to use SMB.

 

12 minutes ago, Max Koch said:

I have terrible read and write speeds, although I only use wifi, I expected higher speeds (speeds are around 2 Mb per second, both read and write)(I have activated cache usage for all shares

Do you really mean 2Mb, or do you mean 2MB?

 

There are a number of possible settings for cache usage and some people have gotten in trouble by not understanding them. They are explained in the Help but here is a link with more: https://lime-technology.com/forums/topic/46802-faq-for-unraid-v6/?page=2#comment-537383

 

 

Read speed is always at the speed of the single disk. Writing to the parity array will be slower since parity is updated realtime. User shares set to cache-yes will write to cache and be moved to array later so the slower write to the array is postponed, but those cached writes are unprotected unless you have a redundant cache pool.

 

If you want someone to take a look at possible problems with your speeds go to Tools - Diagnostics (preferably after the activity but before reboot) and post the complete zip.

[Max Koch]

Thank you for the quick answer.

I will see into it.

 

I have installed the "fix common problems" app and it suggested me to install "dynamix ssd trim" for better performence. Does it help?

3 minutes ago, trurl said:

Do you really mean 2Mb, or do you mean 2MB?

I mean bytes so about 16Mbits 

It still takes me about half an hour for less than a gigabyte

[JorgeB]

29 minutes ago, Max Koch said:

although I only use wifi

First thing would be to use a cable, even if it's just to rule out wifi issues, in my experience wifi speeds can be very inconstant and a very bad idea for a file server.

[Max Koch]

The server is used for a company and the people working there dont have stationary workplaces, means everybody is only using the Wifi. No one bothers using LAN. So getting it to work mediocre (about 20MB/s or 30MB/s) would be great

[trurl]

4 minutes ago, Max Koch said:

The server is used for a company and the people working there dont have stationary workplaces, means everybody is only using the Wifi. No one bothers using LAN. So getting it to work mediocre (about 20MB/s or 30MB/s) would be great

 

But could you use a wired connection for testing? Might help narrow down problems. And

 

20 minutes ago, trurl said:

If you want someone to take a look at possible problems with your speeds go to Tools - Diagnostics (preferably after the activity but before reboot) and post the complete zip.

 

[JorgeB]

The server is used for a company and the people working there dont have stationary workplaces, means everybody is only using the Wifi. No one bothers using LAN. So getting it to work mediocre (about 20MB/s or 30MB/s) would be great

 

Yes, why I mentioned even if it's only for testing.

 

 

[Max Koch]

tower-diagnostics-20180312-0835.zip

 

here is the diagnostics zip

[Max Koch]

At the moment I'm not able to get a wired connection. I need to get an adapter from my own stash...

[Max Koch]

Hello,

I'm finally done testing and I've got some interesting results:

-The transfer write speeds finally hits 170 "Mb/s" but drops to 8 "Mb/s" after filling the RAM (After filling the RAM it switches to the SSD but I believe the Speed is still far to low)

-The Read speed has improved to an acceptable level

-The improvement just appeared one day. I haven't messed with the settings enough to make the change.

 

I would be very happy If someone could explain why the transfer rate to the USB is still dreadful. The advertised read and write speeds are at about 300 MB/s (2400 Mb/s).

 

So there are sill some strange behaviour 

[trurl]

5 minutes ago, Max Koch said:

explain why the transfer rate to the USB

What does USB have to do with this?

[Max Koch]

3 minutes ago, trurl said:

What does USB have to do with this?

I'm sorry. I mean SSD

[trurl]

New diagnostics? Collected after the behavior but before reboot.

[Max Koch]

Here are the new diagnostics

tower-diagnostics-20180327-0924.zip

Edited March 27, 2018 by Max Koch

[trurl]

Have you tried using SMB instead of AFP?

[Max Koch]

About that...

I  only test with Macs because that’s the only platform that will utilize the server. 

I know afp is for Mac and smb for windows. 

In the finder window I can see a NAS called „TOWER“ and another one called „AFP-TOWER“

 

I have to admit I don’t understand which is being used when. AFP was turned on for a while but then I switched it off for testing. Since then I haven’t touched said setting. 

 

Could you please enlighten me?

[trurl]

Under Settings, Network Services, there is are global settings for each protocol, AFP, NFS, SMB.

 

Each user share has its own security settings for each enabled protocol.

[Max Koch]

Ah. Ok. So for the next step I’ll enable afp on both the share itself and the network setting and see if the results change or not.

I’m not at the office anymore so I will see to it very soon. 

Thanks a lot again. 

[trurl]

Actually I was suggesting you try SMB instead of AFP since your syslog makes me think it is doing AFP.

[Max Koch]

hi,

reviving this thread because the server was donated to me from the company after they didn't use it. 

since then I learned more but still can't resolve this issue.

I now tried 2 things: once with AFP still; once with AFP completely disabled

the data transfer happens and it fills up the ram to a certain point after that the performance plummets.

I also seem to not be able to consistently write files. The write in bursts

 

AFP still active:

 

 

With AFP deactivated completely:

 

What I don't get is that it takes 1,5 hours to copy a 30gb file. The computer reports to have sent already 10gb over the network while the progress is at 5gb of 30gb.

 

I've also noticed that the spikes of the storage get bigger with time. Largest one was 300 MB/s

 

I don't know if I'm expecting to much...