dual Gigabit PORTS

[smilesnkisses]

let my first post start with, I LOVE this site.
sure, it frustrates me a little in being over specific here, and under specific there, but it is wonderful.

I will list an improvement before I list my request
in improvements, sometimes too much information makes thing less clear,
so,, when I see charts, I just want to know general read and write speeds,
and yes, some 'other' reader, may want an exact functionality test.
Myself,, sometimes I copy 10,000 mp3 files of 1-4 MB in directories
sometimes I copy files that at 100MB or 2 GB directory of 4 large files and 40 small ones, sometimes I want to stream HD video at upto 30 MBps
sometimes I want to copy 500GB of assorted files.
when I see the DoM Disk on Module ( Disk on memory ) flash ram drives
and the charts, and the HIGH throughputs 800 MB/s which drops to TRUE rate
once the file size get equal to the DoM size I think
what is the point of telling me, that files smaller than 512 MB transfer instantly with a NAS having a DoM of 512 MB, like, who cares, it is instant,
820 or 812 MB/s for 200Mb file,, really?
so,, I would have the charts always start at above the DoM size,
currently they are 1GB, so just test files 2 or 5 GB and bigger
the chart is useless lower and truly not real, you are NOT sending 800MB/s across 100MB/s gigabit ethernet,, that is cache and just confusing, ignore it.

so,, what is my issue,
Synology 411+ seems like a nice machine to me,
affordable ( 500-$1000 )
has four drives,, raid 5 etc
gigabit etc

NONE have USB 3.0 yet,,, I wish they did,
but,,
what about,,, Qnap
459 or 439 in pro or pro + or pro2 or pro 2+ or whatever,
DUAL gigabit ports

can I know get FASTER data output,
or,, can two users get gigabit output
gigabit, 120 MB/s limit
achieving 80-100 MB/s lovely
I am over my 24-30 MB/s video stream requirement
I am over my 60 MB/s significant step up from 30
I am approaching the 120 MB/s gigabit limit,
so,, my range is, 80+ ( aka 80-105 )
and under $1000

where is the test showing me,, DOUBLE that speed, by using dual gigabit
maybe dual gigabit into a server
or dual or wuad fibre channel into a server or a switch
or whatever, can I get 160-200 MB/s second, and HAVE a Qnap advantage?
either 80 to two users or 160 to one?
I am not talking about the second port is a fall back fail safe port,

Are there any uses in buying these dual gigabit port machines?
They make them,, there must be more than just fail safe uses.
I cant find these reviews.

I wish all machines were tested equally
I wish, I could pick a test that listed ALL machines,, not some machines had this test others didnt some had that test.

I wish I could see the dual gigabit,, increased performance.

enough gripping,,, this is the BEST site I have found

thanks

 

[00Roush]

I would agree that some of the NAS chart information is a bit confusing and inconsistent. On the other side though I understand why. Over time the NAS testing methods have changed in part to keep up with technology as well as to better reflect real world performance. This is why SNB has moved to using a newer testbed as well as using Intel's NAS Performance Toolkit to help measure NAS performance. http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/nas/nas-howto/31249-how-we-test-networked-storage-devices-revision-4 Also the default page for the NAS charts has been changed to show the file copy tests in Windows because this has been found to better reflect real world performance.

As for the dual gigabit ports... To my knowledge teaming of multiple ports does not allow speeds greater than a single port can provide unless you are connecting with multiple clients. At least not in my experience with my Netgear switch. So if you have a dual port NIC in the NAS and client and a switch capable of teaming you still would not see speeds greater than 120 MB/sec (in one direction) to a single client. If multiple clients are involved you could see up to 120 MB/sec additional throughput for each extra port. So for dual ports you could roughly see 240 MB/sec max combined throughput (in one direction) if you had 2 or more clients transferring data to/from the NAS at the same time. This is of course provided your NAS has enough processing power to move that much data per second.

So in short yes the NAS boxes that have dual gigabit ports can provide more bandwidth. But to my knowledge you are still limited to a max of about 120 MB/sec per single client when using gigabit Ethernet.

If you interested here is some testing I did a while back with my server and a dual port Intel server NIC. http://forums.smallnetbuilder.com/showthread.php?t=3313

00Roush

 

[smilesnkisses]

thanks, dual Gb ethernet port or not

The question I am contemplating, is whether to adopt the new QNAP ts-459 Pro+ at $900 or the Synology 411+ at $650
there is a fairly noteworthy cost difference, and the performances seem equal on single port GbE ( gig-E )
so, I am wondering, with dual clients, ( yes I have multi port NIC, and switches etc such as Servers with dual fibre channel etc )

Will I get my increased throughput, with the second port?
a simultaneous read by one client while write by another
or two clients reading on two ports.

I do understand a single gig-E port will have a cap less than the theoretical max of 120MB/s
I am just wondering can I get more than 120 out of a QNAP, as it cant happen with a SYNOLOGY.

so,, truly, I am wondering, where is the application, where the QNAP will out shine ( throughput ) the Synology.

I am not sure I need the Citrix etc added functionality.

I appreciate your response, and it is the same thoughts I am having, it 'could; help,, I am just wondering where to find the tests, or why QNAP doesn't emphasize this advantage, IF it does exist.

I wish they had USB 3.0 on ANY box.
AS always I dont want to over invest buying a bunch of boxes, that in 6 months or a year are far surpassed, by dual gig-E port usage or usb 3.0

The Synology 411+ seems to be the best deal, in this ball park,
RNDU4000, TS-439 pro2+, TS-459 pro+ and 411+ for performance vs cost.

 

[thiggins]

Dual Gigabit ports are more of a marketing thing and for reliability / redundancy vs. higher thoughput. As 00Roush said, you are only going to see a throughput advantage with multiple clients. But multiple clients will mean head seeking, which will kill throughput.

So unless you have a need for port redundancy, I wouldn't select a NAS on the basis of dual ports alone.

Buffalo's new NASes have USB 3.0 ports.

 

[00Roush]

I should also add that you might want to do a search on the forums for posts by Dennis Wood looking for the word teaming. He previously did a good amount of testing with his QNAP TS509 and a couple of other high end NASes.

Also wanted to point out that in my opinion most of the Atom based NASes just don't have the CPU horsepower to benefit from teaming/link aggregation. This is based on some tests I have done with underclocking a Athlon 64 X2 CPU to 1.4 Ghz and looking at CPU usage during file transfers. CPU usage when serving files was generally higher than 70% and transfer speeds fell to under 100 MB/sec. (settled around 80 MB/sec) At 2.8 Ghz this same computer was able to serve files at roughly 113 MB/sec. So overall I think that unless you have a high powered NAS you will have a tough time getting higher than 100-120 MB/sec combined throughput with dual port NAS.

As to the point about USB 3.0 and not wanting your NAS to become obsolete in 6 months... I say your better off building your own NAS. Way cheaper along with higher performance. But I am more of a DIY person anyway.

00Roush