Print

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

[sghayal]

And from that you conclude the DSN-321 does not support 1000Mbps network?!! 

Please answer my simple question, why does not DNS-321 to not support 1000-Tx standard?

Thanks

[mig]

The DNS-321 does support 1000-Tx standard.

I think the reason you are not achieving faster transfer rates has more
to do with your computer and your network than the nic in the DNS-321.

The best rates you should get (from empirical test results www.smallnetbuilder.com)
is around 16MBytes/sec.

Try this experiment (if you have the hardware), put a gigabit nic in your windows
computer and run this NAS performance tester http://www.808.dk/?code-csharp-nas-performance

[sghayal]

You have preformed a completely uncontrolled test, therefore no reasonable conclusion can be reached.

You have chosen to test your DNS-321 with two VERY different computers:
different OS, different network cards, different motherboards, different filesystems.

And from that you conclude the DSN-321 does not support 1000Mbps network?!! 
What I think you should be trying to figure out is, why your linux box can't achieve the
transfer rate that smallnetbuilder.com (and others) are able to achieve, instead of making
claims that the DNS-321 is flawed.

Well it not totally uncontrolled environment. This is totally controlled environment where I have 2 d-link devices (1) switch and (2) NAS and from what I am seeing is the performance is matching that of another device which only had 100MBPS line. Offcourse your doubt is valid that Linux might not be able to pump at higher speeds but if you look at my experiments during windows tests, I have loaded linux box with other network related functions too, like transfering same ISO image to Apple TV box and watching live movie at the same time. And there was no difference in transfer speeds with my windows machine with windows network piple totally full at at 80-85%. Thus I am concluding that my Linux machine is able to transfer at higher then 100 MBPS rate.


The question that still remains unanswered is why does DNS-321 not support 1000-Tx standard. Should not it be implied that when you support 1000mbps signalling you should also support 1000-tx standard.

Thanks

[sghayal]

The DNS-321 does support 1000-Tx standard.

Not to be offensive but how can you claim DNS-321 supports 1000-tx (technical name for the standard is IEEE 802.3ab 1000Base-T Gigabit) when Dlink folks don't claim to support it.

Look at the links below and see if you can find support for 1000-tx standard.

ftp://ftp10.dlink.com/pdfs/products/DNS-321/DNS-321_ds.pdf

[fordem]

sghyal

How about you read the thread, and look at some of the links that other users of the DNS-321 have contributed.

How can you insist that it provides only 100mbps performance when ...

a) in the first post YOU claim 10-14 MBPS - that requires 80-112 mbps - which is faster than 100mbps.
b) the fourth response indicates a jump from 15-18 mbps with the use of jumbo frame - 15-18 mbps is 120-144 mbps, again faster than 100 mbps, and jumbo frame does not run on 100 mbps networks.
c) the sixth post links to a review claiming 16.1 MBytes/s - or - 128.8 mbps, again over 100 mbps.

The suggestion has been made that your network infrastructure is what may be limiting you to low performance, you apparently choose to ignore this - other folks are obviously getting >100 mbps out of their DNS-321 - why can't you?

Oh sorry - you are too - based on your first post.

[nossy]

I think everyone is missing his main point because honestly, most of us would not consider it applicable...

In THIS PDF ftp://ftp10.dlink.com/pdfs/products/DNS-321/DNS-321_ds.pdf , on page 2, under "Standards" it does NOT list 1000Base-TX.  It is the lack of this text in the PDF that sghyal is basing his assumptions from.  Since the device does indeed connect at 10/100/1000Mbit speeds, I would assume this was simply a mistake and D-Link left it out of the PDF.

That's it, period, end of story...

[fordem]

I read the PDF when he first linked to it - and I don't think that's his main point - I think it's the straw he's grasping at (as in a drowning man will ...)

His problem, based on the first three posts is that he's dissatisfied with the throughput he's getting - he's been repeatedly told that a gigabit network will not necessarily deliver gigabit throughput and also that anything over 100 mbps - which he is apparently getting - can be considered gigabit speeds.

[nossy]

I read the PDF when he first linked to it - and I don't think that's his main point - I think it's the straw he's grasping at (as in a drowning man will ...)

His problem, based on the first three posts is that he's dissatisfied with the throughput he's getting - he's been repeatedly told that a gigabit network will not necessarily deliver gigabit throughput and also that anything over 100 mbps - which he is apparently getting - can be considered gigabit speeds.

Fact remains, until D-Link comes in and says "Yes, we support 1000BaseTX, the PDF was a misprint" he's going to be convinced it's the unit and not his network.

[fordem]

I really don't think D-Link admitting the PDF has a mistake and/or them correcting it will change how he feels - so it supports 1000BaseTX - all that does is confirm the 1000 litre/second pipe ...

D-link provides a pipe that will carry 1000 liters of water /second but the provided pump is only pumping at 100 liters of water / second

He's concerned about the 100 litre/second pump and realistically speaking - it's what - a 300 litre/second pump?

The DNS-321 cannot deliver anywhere near gigabit/second speeds, many gigabit equipped devices can't.

[garyhgaryh]

I'm seeing very similiar results as sghayal.

I decided to upgrade to a gigabit network (finally) in hopes to speed up backups and copies to my NAS.

I installed a dlink DGS-2208 8 port gigabit switch.

Before installing my new gigabit nic card, I decided to run some quick test.  I took a 4.35 GB (4,681,455,616 bytes) iso and copied it from my dns-321 to my desktop over wireless.  I let the copy go on for about a minute and recorded the stats:
2.3 MB/s
32 minutes

Then I pulled out the wireless card and plugged in a network cable to the onboard nic and ran the test again and got the following (running at 100 on the onboard nic):
7.5-7.7 MB/s
8:50 minutes

I then put in my new gigabit lan card (I'll admit it's a cheap one from Trendnet model teg-pcitxr) and ran the test again and only saw a slight improvement.
11.1 MB/s
6:50 minutes

It's faster, yes, but nowhere near what I expected.  I would never assume the gigabit nic would run 10x faster than a 10/100 nic running at 100, but 3-4x is what others are seeing.  I'm only see an increase in 1.5x so it got me wondering if my switch was running at 100MB/s in mixed mode.  I confirmed this switch does not pull down all ports in mixed mode to lowest common denominator speed, so I assume I have issues with the dns-321. 

After seeing sghayal's post, I believe that although the dsn-321 does support the gigabit signaling, it cannot maintain a gigabit bandwidth rate.

I'd like to test this on a dns-323 which I have, but it's boxed up with no drives to do testing with.

Yes, I know I am not testing this in a controlled environment.  It's controlled enough for me and it should have been at the very least be significantly faster (when I say significant, 2x would do ).

Gary

[garyhgaryh]

Ran another test...

After copying the iso from the nas (DNS-321) to the desktop, I copied the same file from the desktop to the laptop.  Both machines have gigabit NICs.

From DNS-321 to Desktop on a gigabit network I get 11.1 MB/s (6:50 - time to copy the file)
From desktop to dell laptop (both have gigabit nics on a gigabit network) I get a whooping 23-26MB/s with a copy time of about 3:15.  I copied the file back from the laptop to the desktop and I get similiar performance numbers.

I don't have jumbo frames set, but that shouldn't be a major issue.  I have a feeling my dns-321 isn't performing up to gigabit performance levels.

On my 10/100 nic running at 100 this is a 3x (almost 4x) increase in performance comparison.  I'm happy with this inexpensive nic card.  I'm not so happy with the gigabit performance on the dns-321 (lets hope this isn't an issue with the dns-323 which I also have ).

Gary

[fordem]

If it's > 100 mbps, it's gigabit performance - you may not be happy with it, but it's gigabit performance.

The DNS-323 will deliver roughly the same speeds without jumbo frame, and with jumbo enabled you'll probably see 30~35 MB/sec.

Now let me ask this - and more to open your eyes than get an answer ...

Where is the bottleneck?  Is it the network infrastructure itself (the cables, router & switches), is it the DNS-321 (the disks, the processor, the memory, the NIC), is it the other computer (the disks, the processor, the memory, the NIC)

I'm transferring data from my IBM server to my DNS-323 - a backup - throughput, according to my network switch is 3,285 kbit/sec - :O

Just in case you're curious the NIC in a DNS-323, which I believe is the same in the DNS-321 is capable of 400 mbit/sec transfers - roughly 50 MByte/sec - so there's a pretty big difference between what it can pass and what you have measured - might be an idea to find out why.

[garyhgaryh]

If it's > 100 mbps, it's gigabit performance - you may not be happy with it, but it's gigabit performance.

The DNS-323 will deliver roughly the same speeds without jumbo frame, and with jumbo enabled you'll probably see 30~35 MB/sec.

Now let me ask this - and more to open your eyes than get an answer ...

Where is the bottleneck?  Is it the network infrastructure itself (the cables, router & switches), is it the DNS-321 (the disks, the processor, the memory, the NIC), is it the other computer (the disks, the processor, the memory, the NIC)

I'm transferring data from my IBM server to my DNS-323 - a backup - throughput, according to my network switch is 3,285 kbit/sec - :O

Just in case you're curious the NIC in a DNS-323, which I believe is the same in the DNS-321 is capable of 400 mbit/sec transfers - roughly 50 MByte/sec - so there's a pretty big difference between what it can pass and what you have measured - might be an idea to find out why.

Thanks for your reply. 

Ok, if I'm running a tad over 100 mbps, then it's gigabit performance?  If that's how it's definate, then I won't argue that point, but that is damn poor performance, don't you agree?  To me it's like saying I have a Porsche twin turbo... a super car, but for some reason I can't go over 60mph when I floor it.

Now, you're saying that I'm having issues elsewhere and I should be able to get "roughly 50 MB/s".  When I achieved over 20MB/s between two computers, I was using the same switch, the same type of wires, yet I'm only getting around 10MB/s with the dns-321.  I'll be happy to be around 20MB/s with the dns-321.  If i have a bottle neck what do you suggest I try? It's a simple network here.  I have two gigabit switches and I can swap them out but why? They are both brand spanking new and the switch indicates I'm in gigabit mode. The cables are cat 5e.  I can swap all these if you like, but the question is more than 1 forum member is experiencing the same issue.  I just verified last night I can get a transfer rate of about 3-4x faster than my computers equipped with 100mbps NICs.  I just can't do it with the dns-321.

You're saying with jumbo frames I should be seeing 30-35Mb/sec.  That I haven't tried yet, but a forum member here said that jumbo frame was good for 2-3MB/sec only.  If this is case, then I currently should be running at 27-28MB/sec and I'm not anywhere near that ballpark.

What size jumbo frame are you using? Unfortunately the disadvantage of the new gigabit nic card I have is that jumbo frames are limited to about 7K whereas most gigabit nics allow 9K frames.

Gary

[garyhgaryh]

I'm transferring data from my IBM server to my DNS-323 - a backup - throughput, according to my network switch is 3,285 kbit/sec - :O

3,285 kbit/sec = 3.285mb/sec is roughly .41 MB/sec? is that right?

[garyhgaryh]

Ok it looks like my NAS is running as it should.  Our gigabit NAS just doesn't perform at the gigabit level although it will RUN on a gigabit network, but I guess for the price what are we to expect. 

http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/content/view/30521/75/1/3/

http://forums.dlink.com/index.php?topic=3782.msg21604#msg21604