Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[optical10]

I have been using SMB over the last couple of years but have noticed some lag  when buffering whilst streaming recently on larger movies, so I have two questions:

#1.Has anybody done a transfer rate comparison between the two  network access protocols as a comparison because videos on YouTube state that NFS is twice as quick?

#2. If I do convert my volumes to NFS will I lose the data on said volumes?

Any thoughts much appreciated as I know this is not a blazingly fast NAS but it says my needs and I just want to stretch out it's the usage as much as I can.

Cheers

[fordem]

First - I don't think the DNS-323 supports NFS, so to get NFS you'll need to hack it.
Second, if I'm right both NFS & SMB are access protocols and dictate how you access the NAS, the files are stored using ext2/ext3, so what you would be doing is changing how you communicate with the NAS rather than how the data is stored, so no data should be lost.

Having said that, it's always adviseable to backup your data before making changes.

[JavaLawyer]

Although the DNS-323 does not appear to support NFS, I can speak to the performance of NFS on my DNS-343. The DNS-343 has an option to enable SMB vs. NFS. Switching between either protocol has no impact on stored data or HDD configuration.

That said, SMB performance on the DNS-343 (regardless of file size) has always been exceptional on my particular devices, while NFS performance was always abysmal. I presume the poor NFS performance is related to the NFS implementation on the DNS-343, as other DNS-343 users have reported similar results. This is not to knock the NFS protocol, only that the implementation does not seem to work well on my particular model NAS.

[optical10]

Thanks guys for you time to reply.

Dlink did create an NFS addon in firmware 1.8 for the 323 which ive now enabled with no loss of data on both volumes roots.

On speed front the SMB seems to be average , 6MB/sec for 1.5gb file transfer, accordng to others for that size so im not sure or know how to test only the NFS share speed as others talk about reg edit tweeks to get it to work and I dont think  the speed would be much better according to you guys?

I can only think of deleting the SMB shares to test the new NFS shares if im mistaken?
Is anyone getting way better transfer or streaming speeds on dlinks addon NFS v1.0 mapped share drives for windows or android clinets?

You did read that right, my android samsung tablet can access and map  to the new NFS shares using XMBC media centre sw, just wish it was so easy in windows 7 ultimate with the service started.

[fordem]

Discussing file transfer speeds without mentioning the network over which the data is being transferred, renders the discussion pointless - is it a wired network? gigabit? jumbo frame? wireless? 802.11g? 802.11n - likewise a lack of information about the other system involved in the transfer leaves us with a large unknown factor.

6MB/sec SMB transfers for a 1.5GB file is to put it mildly, ridiculously slow - the DNS-323 is capable of three, four and even five times that - given the right circumstances.

I see you mention Android & Samsung tablets, you would have to be using wireless to transfer data to the tablet, look no further, there's your bottleneck.

Wireless networks are notoriously poor performers at bulk data transfers.  An 802.11g wireless network with an advertised 54mbps speed will max out at approximately 20~24 mbps, enabling a 3MB/sec transer rate, your claimed 6MB/sec would match 802.11n throughput - that's right - ignore the 300/450/600/900 claims, they are all theoretical.

[optical10]

Discussing file transfer speeds without mentioning the network over which the data is being transferred, renders the discussion pointless - is it a wired network? gigabit? jumbo frame?

Okay thanks for your reply, I have now altered my signature to provide the relevant information you suggested. Just to clarify here I'm using both my laptop and desktop wired on gigabit ethernet controllers through my gigabit switch.

wireless? 802.11g? 802.11n - likewise a lack of information about the other system involved in the transfer leaves us with a large unknown factor.

I'm not really concerned about the wireless speeds I just mentioned it to indicate that NFS shares were working on the Samsung Galaxy note tablet wirelessly through XMBC android software.

6MB/sec SMB transfers for a 1.5GB file is to put it mildly, ridiculously slow - the DNS-323 is capable of three, four and even five times that - given the right circumstances.

If that is the case then I'm glad I asked the question as I had no idea those transfer speeds were slow. Now I definitely need to read a tutorial on how to speed up transfer and streaming speeds of the NAS using the two Seagate 750 GB  Barracuda 7200.speed hard drives, any suggestions for a good "setup tutorial" to speed up the 323 NAS?

I see you mention Android & Samsung tablets, you would have to be using wireless to transfer data to the tablet, look no further, there's your bottleneck.

As stated above I'm happy with my android tablet wireless transfer speeds as the quoted 6MB/sec SMB transfers for a 1.5GB file was on the wired gigabit network.

It would be nice to increase the SMB transfers speeds first before attempting to transfer solely to NFS protocol, by disabling the SMB volume shares, if you guys deemed it worth the effort to  switch to NFS to increase my transfers/streaming speeds.

Once again any suggestions and contributions are much appreciated

[fordem]

The first thing to recognise about a file transfer is that it starts as a datafile on a disk, and finishes as a data file on a disk and as such it is not reflective of network throughput - the transfer rate will be limited by the slowest channel through which the data flows on it's journey from one disk to the next. 

When the DNS-323 was released, it was advertised (on the box) as being capable of speeds in the 20MB/sec region - I no longer have the box to quote those numbers, write was slightly under 20MB/s, read slightly over, and it will deliver those numbers as long as a) the network can handle the traffic levels, b) the other end of the transfer can handle those numbers, and c) the drives in the NAS are not fragmented.

Oh - you'll see higher throughput with larger file sizes - for example a single 1GB file will transfer a lot faster than 100 x 10MB files.

There's not a lot you can do to speed up the NAS, you just need to track down the bottleneck and remove that.

Search these forums for NASTester (or NAS tester) and you should find a link that you can download a test utility from - the utility was written specifically to test these NAS, and it works by creating a file of the size you choose, and then transferring that file in each direction as many times as you choose, and then averages the results.

A 100mbps network is capapble of handling maybe 9MB/sec or so, a gigabit network will double that, and jumboframe can net you another 50% or so, getting you in the 30MB/sec region - PROVIDED THE OTHER END CAN ACCOMODATE IT.

My desktop is an older Dell Optiplex (one of their business class products) with an onboard gigabit NIC, the disk subsystem limits it to just over 5MB/sec on a transfer from my NAS, but the same NAS, with no changes, over the same network will deliver just over 30MB/sec to an IBM server (of the same vintage as the desktop), also with an onboard gigabit NIC - the server has a much faster disk subsystem than the desktop.

The NAS is admittedly not very fast, but, as you can see, the problem frequently lies at the other end of the transfer.

[optical10]

Sorry for delay in replying I've been win8 deadline busy before the first of february 2013 . Will
 try your suggestion this weekend, thanks

[optical10]

OK guys I'm struggling to huntdown/google "NASTester" or "NAS Tester", anyone care to share it?

Cheerz

[ivan]

Try looking for 23699-NASTP_v1_7_1_Setup.zip from Intel.  Intel has now opened the source and stopped development of it so it doesn't appear in their normal list of tools any more.

[fordem]

I guess Google doesn't search these forums.

http://www.808.dk/?code-csharp-nas-performance

[optical10]

Try looking for 23699-NASTP_v1_7_1_Setup.zip from Intel.  Intel has now opened the source and stopped development of it so it doesn't appear in their normal list of tools any more.

Cheers, the Intel reference really helped I was able to find it using this Google search "intel nas performance toolkit windows 7" which resulted in this Windows 7 version URL below:

http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-nas-performance-toolkit

Running "Exerciser" and now will report back with results but in the meantime I woke up with a brainwave of turning on "Jumbo frames" for starters, what do you guys think?
Many Thanks