Print

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

[TeK3030]

Hello all,

I have read through alot of threads but didn't really find an answer I was looking for.

I am trying to transfer a 126gb file to it and it says it is going to take about 1 day to transfer.  What the heck.  This does not seem right.  What could be the issue?  I have 2 other files triple this in size to transfer.

I have been pulling out my hair on this and could use some input.

I have 4 1.5TB Seagate 7200rpm drives in raid 5.  The router I have is a Dlink DIR-655 Xtreme N Gigabit Router.  I have a P5Q pro turbo mother board with a Atheros® L1E Gigabit LAN controller featuring AI NET 2.  The processor is Intel Q6600 2.4ghz quad core and I have 8gb of ram with windows 7 64bit.

Volume Name:      Volume_1
Volume Type:     RAID 5
Sync Time Remaining:     2350.3 minute(s)
Total Hard Drive Capacity:     4423105 MB
Used Space:     12388 MB
Unused Space:     4410716 MB

[wential]

I can't answer the tech reason why the 343 is so slow in Raid 5 but I have similar issues with all of my 343's. I think it's related to the speed of the 343's board not your PC.

As we speak, I'm moving over 300,000 image files (50gb total) off the 343 to my Windows Server and it will end up taking about 3-4 days. That is over 100 times slower than moving them between 2 NTFS Windows computers.

Hopefully in the future, the 343's will be capable of NTFS, I'm getting weary of the EXT 2-3 file system after using it for 6 months. For all you Linux lovers, sorry nothing personal.

I only have the 343's because I love my D-Link equipment. I have all D-Link routers, 3 wireless cameras (D-ViewCam Beta version 3 is awesome), NAS devices (I have 4 now) and multiple gigabit switches.

[JavaLawyer]

To estimate how long the copy will actually take, you can measure the time it takes to move a test file of 5 GB. Using this information you can extrapolate to obtain a realistic estimate of moving the full 126 GB.  126/5 = 25.

Configured in standard mode, my DNS-343s can push/pull 5 GB in approximately 8-10 minutes, so 126 GB = approximately 200 to 240 minutes = 3 to 4 hours

[wential]

Simplified, JavaLawyer is saying not to use RAID in the DNS-343 to get maximum performance.

[JavaLawyer]

Simplified, JavaLawyer is saying not to use RAID in the DNS-343 to get maximum performance.

I'm not advocating a non-RAID configuration, but was simply illustrating a quick-and-dirty method I typically use to benchmark realistic copy times for large migrations.  However, from what I've read on these forums in the past, non-RAID configurations seem to perform better than RAID.  The choice to use RAID vs. non-RAID must be weighed against the importance of data redundancy.

Personally, I've opted for a standard mode configuration because my data on my primary DNS-343 is backed-up to a second DNS-343, with a third physical device providing an additional backup for critical data.  RAID may provide redundancy, but your data should still be backed up on another physical device.

[wential]

You are probably right. Due to lack of RAID performance, I'm considering doing that with my 4 DNS-343's right now. I think I'll use 2 343's in standard config mode, and use the other 2 343's as backups also in standard config mode.

[JavaLawyer]

You are probably right. Due to lack of RAID performance, I'm considering doing that with my 4 DNS-343's right now. I think I'll use 2 343's in standard config mode, and use the other 2 343's as backups also in standard config mode.

The only thing I don't care for with this configuration is the logistics of managing 4 separate volumes on each DNS-343, as opposed to a single large volume via RAID 5.  Other than that one small gripe, I'm happy with the performance and haven't had any issues.

Additionally, using standard configuration avoids any of the potential volume rebuild issues I periodically read about (although I'm sure these occurences are more of the exception rather than the rule).  At most, only one of 4 volumes will be affected in the event of a single HDD failure.

[TeK3030]

Thanks for the replies.  It actually took 12.5 hours in the end.  Pretty damn surprised to tell you the truth.  I read a bunch of reviews but wish I found these forums before hand.  I wonder what the exact difference in performance would be if switched to a standard config?  Has anyone done a test?

[JavaLawyer]

Thanks for the replies.  It actually took 12.5 hours in the end.  Pretty damn surprised to tell you the truth.  I read a bunch of reviews but wish I found these forums before hand.  I wonder what the exact difference in performance would be if switched to a standard config?  Has anyone done a test?

Here's something I wrote earlier in this thread regarding the performance of my DNS-343 in standard configuration:

To estimate how long the copy will actually take, you can measure the time it takes to move a test file of 5 GB. Using this information you can extrapolate to obtain a realistic estimate of moving the full 126 GB.  126/5 = 25.

Configured in standard mode, my DNS-343s can push/pull 5 GB in approximately 8-10 minutes, so 126 GB = approximately 200 to 240 minutes = 3 to 4 hours

[JavaLawyer]

Another reference for comparison. . . When I originally configured my second DNS-343, the copy time to push data from the source DNS-343 to destination DNS-343 averaged approximately:

• 1.5TB = ~40+ hours (give or take a few hours)
  
• 2.0 TB = ~65+ hours (give or take a few hours)

These numbers should provide rough estimates demonstrating the order of magnitude for standard volumes (at least on my network).

[koushi]

Sync Time Remaining:     2350.3 minute(s)

I would have thought the nas resyncing would have an effect on the transfer rates...

[TeK3030]

What is that for? 39 hours for what?  Just seems like when the ip lease will expire to me.