Print

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

[gunrunnerjohn]

How are you configuring "exact sizes"?  I get a limited number of choices when configuring any of the boxes.  For instance, if I want 4k frames, Windows allows me to choose 1514, 2514, 4514, or 9014 in the NIC properties.  The DNS-323 allows 3000, 4000, 5000, 6000, 7000, 8000, 9000.  Hard to make an exact match there.

[tedfroop]

Thats what I meant - 9014 under the nic properties.  That was all I needed besides setting the dns and away I went.

Is it possible your router or something that's 100 speed is routing traffic?  Is your DHCP server gigabit and jumbo frames capable?

Do you use a Hosts file?  (C:\windows\system32\drivers\etc)  Try adding your dns's address and name there  (Yes - I use one.)

[gunrunnerjohn]

My router is 100mbit, however everything is connected to gigabit switches.  The DHCP server is the router, but has no bearing on jumbo frames.  Since I get much faster speeds to other devices, it's obvious that I'm getting gigabit transfers.  It's curious that jumbo frames slow things down, that would seem to suggest they're not really working and I'm getting retransmissions.

[tedfroop]

That's exactly what it sounds like.  Could be your pc is asking your dhcp server for the route to get to your NAS, as soon as that 100 device is involved - that sets the speed limit?

I would try a hosts file.  It tells your pc the address and name of the device so it doesn't have to ask where it is.
When you open the file there are examples of addresses.  Add the name and address of your device like this:

        128.100.3.23     MyNas

Save and try it. Because of the limitations of home networks and their lack of file servers and routers to direct traffic I have used hosts files at home ever since I had more than 1 pc.

[gunrunnerjohn]

The DHCP server has no say in the link speed, that is set between the two devices.  Clearly, the DHCP server isn't limiting the speed to 100mbit, because transactions between computers that are dynamically assigned go like the wind, and are certainly not limited to 100mbits.  Also, the main machine and all the NAS boxes are statically allocated, so they don't even bother with the DHCP server for their assignments in any case.

[fordem]

That's exactly what it sounds like.  Could be your pc is asking your dhcp server for the route to get to your NAS, as soon as that 100 device is involved - that sets the speed limit?

I would try a hosts file.  It tells your pc the address and name of the device so it doesn't have to ask where it is.
When you open the file there are examples of addresses.  Add the name and address of your device like this:

        128.100.3.23     MyNas

Save and try it. Because of the limitations of home networks and their lack of file servers and routers to direct traffic I have used hosts files at home ever since I had more than 1 pc.

Strictly speaking there is no "routing" involved in communications between hosts on the same network and a router is not required to "direct" traffic - all you need is a hub or switch to act as a connection point (or concentrator).

In the days "prior to the internet" networks existed with routers, which are only required when you need to connect one or more networks together.

[tedfroop]

So  if you just use a hub or a switch how do the hosts find each other?

[gunrunnerjohn]

If you have fixed IP addresses, (which I tested), they just have to be in the same subnet.  It finds it just fine, just goes slow as snot!

[fordem]

So  if you just use a hub or a switch how do the hosts find each other?

Are you doubting that it works or are you asking for an explanation of the protocols involved?

If it's the first - try this - set static ip addresses on your DNS-323 and on a PC and then plug the DNS-323 directly into the ethernet port on the PC - no hub, no switch and no router.

Open a command prompt on the PC and ping the DNS-323 at the static address you assigned to it, it will respond - open a web browser and enter the ip address and the admin web page will come up - open  explorer and map a drive to the DNS-323 using UNC (Uniform Naming Convention - \\ipaddress\share) syntax and you'll be able to access your files.

Trust me on this - twenty years ago, before Al Gore invented the internet   networks were built with coax cable strung from one PC to the next to the next to the next and so on and so forth, and they all found one another with no hubs, no switches and believe it or not - no routers and no tcp/ip.

Fast forward to today, most people have heard of the internet, many of them have routers, and everything runs over tcp/ip - but you know what - if you're using an ethernet LAN, it still runs over the same basic protocols that Bob Metcalfe invented back in 1973, and a router is not required for two computers on the same LAN to "find" one another.

[fordem]

If you have fixed IP addresses, (which I tested), they just have to be in the same subnet.  It finds it just fine, just goes slow as snot!

C'mon - you KNEW it would work - you HAD to know that - you've been in this business long enough to know.

And by the way - that slow as snot - that's something peculiar to your system, because I can run gigabit & jumbo frame over a direct wire connection and turn in the kind of speeds you see in the composite I posted earlier in the thread.

In fact, my first jumbo frame tests were done that way, because I didn't own a switch that supported jumbo frame, and wanted to see for myself if it was worth going out to buy a switch that did.

[gunrunnerjohn]

C'mon - you KNEW it would work - you HAD to know that - you've been in this business long enough to know.

Of course I knew it would work.

And by the way - that slow as snot - that's something peculiar to your system, because I can run gigabit & jumbo frame over a direct wire connection and turn in the kind of speeds you see in the composite I posted earlier in the thread.

I don't doubt it, but I can't even begin to imagine what is causing the issue. 

In fact, my first jumbo frame tests were done that way, because I didn't own a switch that supported jumbo frame, and wanted to see for myself if it was worth going out to buy a switch that did.

I made sure all the switches did jumbo frames.  The odd part is that at one point, I was getting better speeds from the boxes, and I can't imagine what changed to screw up jumbo frames.  The fact that even the Synology DS-209 slows down with jumbo frames convinces me that particular issue isn't the DNS-323.  However, I get transfers of 80-90mbytes/sec to other Windows boxes, so clearly it works some of the time.  One day I'll trip over the reason and feel stupid.

[vk]

On my netbook running Win7 with gigabit NIC this tool reports average 15MB/s write and 18MB/s read, however the actual transfer speed as reported by windows explorer is only around 6MB/s write and 8MB/s read. What's the catch?

[vk]

Never mind, it turns out what Nastester reports is actually correct, on my netbook (HP mininote 2133) the bottle neck for network transfer speed is actually visual effect, after I disabled "Animate controls and elements inside windows" under "Performance Options\Visual Effects" the read speed from my DNS-323 shoots up to a stable 17~18MB/s... now I call it gigabit   

[gunrunnerjohn]

Well, I did a few tests here again with EXT2 filesystem on a bare freshly formatted drive.  For reasons I'll never understand, I still can't seem to get jumbo frames to work anymore.  Something has certainly changed, but I have the same computer, switches, and DNS-323 version, so I'm at a loss as to what it is!  Since I also have an oddity with my router and this computer, I'm going to pick up an Intel PCI-EX NIC and see if the on-board NICs are part of the issue.

You can also see the impact that EXT2 vs. EXT3 has for a single drive configuration.


Jumbo frames 9000
Running a 500MB file write on drive z: once...
Average (W):     9.32 MB/sec
Running a 500MB file read on drive z: once...
Average (R):     13.87 MB/sec

Jumbo frames 4000
Running a 500MB file write on drive z: once...
Average (W):     9.16 MB/sec
Running a 500MB file read on drive z: once...
Average (R):     13.6 MB/sec

Jumbo frames disabled
Running a 500MB file write on drive z: once...
Average (W):     15 MB/sec
Running a 500MB file read on drive z: once...
Average (R):     14.66 MB/sec

Jumbo frames disabled with the EXT3 disk back in
Running a 500MB file write on drive z: once...
Average (W):     11.63 MB/sec
Running a 500MB file read on drive z: once...
Average (R):     13.62 MB/sec

[tedfroop]

I would also go to Nvidia and pick up the new nic drivers released 3/15/10.