SmallNetBuilder Forums
Go Back   SmallNetBuilder Forums > NAS > NAS Article Discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-17-2011, 06:31 PM
GregN's Avatar
GregN GregN is offline
Very Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 478
Thanks: 34
Thanked 54 Times in 53 Posts
GregN is just starting out
Default Build Your Own Fibre Channel SAN

I'm seeing in NASPT benchmark mysterious performance figures for File Copy to NAS - all the other figures are where you would expect them to be, but this figure is anomalously way low. Stripe size isn't enough to explain the figure, and (a bit of a preview) it doesn't get better under SAN performance. Any ideas?

Also anyone have hands on experience tuning Openfiler for 3Ware raid controllers? Lessons learned?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-17-2011, 10:08 PM
tazdevil tazdevil is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 8
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
tazdevil is just starting out
Default Build your Own FC SAN - Connection Question

From the diagram, it appears this storage sub system will be connected into a server via Fiber? can you please clarify? also is connecting the fiber into your network provided your switches support fiber an option? or only connected via ethernet?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-17-2011, 11:42 PM
GregN's Avatar
GregN GregN is offline
Very Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 478
Thanks: 34
Thanked 54 Times in 53 Posts
GregN is just starting out
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tazdevil View Post
From the diagram, it appears this storage sub system will be connected into a server via Fiber? can you please clarify? also is connecting the fiber into your network provided your switches support fiber an option? or only connected via ethernet?
Part two of the series will answer all of these questions.

But the plan is to connect the SAN server via fiber to a DAS server ( my mainline Windows 7 box ), the Windows 7 DAS server sees the SAN as a disk, albeit a very large one - a disk that can be shared like any. That is how the storage is shared over the network.

The scenario that you mention, a switch that handles both your tcp/ip traffic and fiber traffic doesn't really work, they are two different protocols, tcp/ip and fcp ( fibre channel protocol ). Sort like expecting Air Traffic Control to handle traffic jams on Highway 95.

Switches exist for fiber but we aren't using one (outside of the 1K budget), there might be switches that handle iscsi to fcp translation, I don't know. But again, expensive. You can run ethernet on a fiber cable, but that isn't fibre channel.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-24-2011, 11:21 PM
mjw mjw is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
mjw is just starting out
Default Add an SSD cache?

Given the performance results are below that of a small Sandforce SSD, I'd be very interested to see if something like Flashcache (http://planet.admon.org/flashcache-c...-in-ssd-disks/) would boost your performance results (especially small file size) for an additional $100?

Also, I'm not sure how the on-board Intel ICH-10R performance compares with the RAID card you used, but I have read a few articles where the ICH-10R paired with a decent CPU has superior performance to dedicated RAID cards:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...a,2374-11.html

However, I suppose the limited number of SATA ports (6) would restrict the maximum capacity of your array to about a third of the 35TB that you are shooting for.

Last edited by mjw; 05-24-2011 at 11:55 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-25-2011, 06:12 AM
GregN's Avatar
GregN GregN is offline
Very Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 478
Thanks: 34
Thanked 54 Times in 53 Posts
GregN is just starting out
Default Re: SSD Cache

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjw View Post
Given the performance results are below that of a small Sandforce SSD, I'd be very interested to see if something like Flashcache (http://planet.admon.org/flashcache-c...-in-ssd-disks/) would boost your performance results (especially small file size) for an additional $100?

Also, I'm not sure how the on-board Intel ICH-10R performance compares with the RAID card you used, but I have read a few articles where the ICH-10R paired with a decent CPU has superior performance to dedicated RAID cards:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...a,2374-11.html

However, I suppose the limited number of SATA ports (6) would restrict the maximum capacity of your array to about a third of the 35TB that you are shooting for.
Supposedly ICH10R will handle port multipliers, addonics has a 5x1 ($50), but I'm still limited to 3Gbps per port right? Won't performance fall dramatically if I put 20 drives on 4 PMs?

The Tom article you shared ( Thanks ) does recommend in the conclusion using a RAID card for a dedicated array, better consistent performance supposedly

I'm running SSD as the system drive, my swap is on SSD...it was a part reused from a previous build, A-Data 32GB. I'll take a look at flash cache, a kernel module? Wonder if it'll work on Openfiler.. Appreciate the pointer

Processor + X58/ICH10R Motherboard would also bust my $150 Budget for the MB/Proc.

If money didn't matter, give me one of those sweet new gen Areca 24Port SAS/SATA 4gig cache RAID cards, man I'd like to see that fly. Areca, if you are reading this, I'd be happy to review one of those puppies, provided I could keep it...
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-25-2011, 06:18 AM
GregN's Avatar
GregN GregN is offline
Very Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 478
Thanks: 34
Thanked 54 Times in 53 Posts
GregN is just starting out
Default

Been tuning performance for part 3 of the article, looking at the DAS server ( which gateways my SAN Node ), the SAN jets, but I lose alot when shared - I'm wondering if there are any ways to squeeze more out of SMB2 under Windows 7.

Anyone got experience tuning SMB under Win7?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-25-2011, 09:33 AM
mjw mjw is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
mjw is just starting out
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GregN View Post
Supposedly ICH10R will handle port multipliers, addonics has a 5x1 ($50), but I'm still limited
to 3Gbps per port right? Won't performance fall dramatically if I put 20 drives on 4 PMs?
If you want to go cheaper, an ICH-9R may have similar performance. Regarding the port multiplier question - if you are able to find a compatible PM then even with 5 drives connected to each PM, the theoretical max bandwidth per drive with 5 drives connected is still 75MB/s. If you add a separate SATA controller dedicated as the system drive then perhaps you could spread the load across all 6 ports on the ICH-10R.

Please do post back and let us know your experiences with flashcache.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-23-2012, 01:42 AM
prattyy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default great article

Quote:
Originally Posted by GregN View Post
I'm seeing in NASPT benchmark mysterious performance figures for File Copy to NAS - all the other figures are where you would expect them to be, but this figure is anomalously way low. Stripe size isn't enough to explain the figure, and (a bit of a preview) it doesn't get better under SAN performance. Any ideas?

Also anyone have hands on experience tuning Openfiler for 3Ware raid controllers? Lessons learned?


hello Greg
great informative article there.
just a few questions there. i see that the results of benchmark in the nas file copy results.
do you think it may be a network interface bandwidth issue.
you said your mother board has two nic ports have you tried link aggregation ?can that be done in openfiler?will that improve the read and write throughput.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-23-2012, 06:42 AM
prattyy prattyy is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
prattyy is just starting out
Default great article

Quote:
Originally Posted by GregN View Post
I'm seeing in NASPT benchmark mysterious performance figures for File Copy to NAS - all the other figures are where you would expect them to be, but this figure is anomalously way low. Stripe size isn't enough to explain the figure, and (a bit of a preview) it doesn't get better under SAN performance. Any ideas?

Also anyone have hands on experience tuning Openfiler for 3Ware raid controllers? Lessons learned?
great article there Greg very informative.

one thing which i don't understand though is why is there so much of diffrence in hd playback results and file copy from nas results?
one more thing is you have stated the the motherboard has two nics.
have you tried link aggregation.does openfiler support this?
will that effectively increase read throughput?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-23-2012, 07:46 PM
GregN's Avatar
GregN GregN is offline
Very Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 478
Thanks: 34
Thanked 54 Times in 53 Posts
GregN is just starting out
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by prattyy View Post
great article there Greg very informative.

one thing which i don't understand though is why is there so much of diffrence in hd playback results and file copy from nas results?
one more thing is you have stated the the motherboard has two nics.
have you tried link aggregation.does openfiler support this?
will that effectively increase read throughput?
HD playback is the continuous "playback" of a single large file, where file copy is based on a large number of small reads across multiple files, the most demanding form of I/O - which is impacted by tcp/ip tuning, stripe size and disk speeds ( caching doesn't help, either on the RAID card, or in the machine because the reads are too small ). HD playback benefits from read ahead, caching and the large stripe size.

Openfiler supports link aggregation and it works fine, but does not impact Old Shuck's throughput largely because all file access/read/write all go through the fibre channel interface as a SAN. When I ran it as a NAS before converting it to SAN, I did not test aggregated throughput, but I see no reason for there not to be improved performance in a multi-node environment.

If you look at the gallery for Ol'Shuck, you will see the final NASPT performance chart.

Last edited by GregN; 06-02-2012 at 06:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:52 AM.

Top 10 Stats
Top Posters* Top Thanked
RMerlin  347
thelonelycode...  167
stevech  156
L&LD  134
azazel1024  116
KGB7  72
Adamm  70
jim769  63
speedingcheet...  59
sm00thpapa  57
RMerlin  4419
stevech  271
ryzhov_al  199
TeHashX  193
RogerSC  165
L&LD  163
joegreat  104
jlake  100
PrivateJoker  93
sinshiva  87
Most Viewed Threads* Hottest Threads*
Old Asuswrt-Merli...  27988
Old ASUS...  18564
Old Beta Version...  17185
Old 'Heartbleed'...  13203
Old Potential...  7648
Old Linksys...  6999
Old Asus-Merlin...  6450
Old Groundhog...  6114
Old Linksys...  4581
Old Linksys...  3400
Old Asuswrt-Merli...  209
Old Linksys...  134
Old Beta Version...  112
Old ASUS...  108
Old Potential...  98
Old Linksys...  61
Old Groundhog...  49
Old Asus router...  43
Old Managing...  38
Old New Home...  38



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2006-2014 Pudai LLC All Rights Reserved.