5 ms·
Is your NAS NVME based if you are using spinning metal you won't reach speeds to saturate 10GbE especially with small file sizes?
by YXNjaGVyZWdlbgo 5y ago
Is your NAS NVME based if you are using spinning metal you won't reach speeds to saturate 10GbE especially with small file sizes?
- mrb 5y agoI have a Linux NAS with 6 7200RPM HDDs in a raidz2 ZFS pool, and the local fs read speed on large files is 7 times faster than GbE, about ~930 MB/s. So while this wouldn't saturate a 10GbE link, it would still be greatly beneficial to multiply the network read speed by 7-fold by upgrading from GbE to 10GbE.
- csdvrx 5y agoHow did you bench your ZFS pool?
- mrb 5y agoWith dd. And normally when I do this I drop the caches with "echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches" but this doesn't work with ZFSOnLinux as it has a separate ARC cache that doesn't get cleared by that command (and I don't believe it's possible to clear it, other than by exporting and reimporting the zpool.) So I read a 10GB chunk of a file that I know is not cached: $ dd if=/some/large/file of=/dev/null bs=1M count=10240 10240+0 records in 10240+0 records out 10737418240 bytes (11 GB, 10 GiB) copied, 11.3378 s, 947 MB/s The 947 MB/s figure printed by dd matches the speed reported by a "zpool iostat tank 1" running during the benchmarking, which confirms I'm not reading from the cache. When I repeat the same command, dd completes almost immediately reporting a speed of about 6-8 GB/s on my machine, while the zpool iostat command shows zero read bandwidth.
- pdimitar 5y agoIt's a ZFS-based NAS with an SSD cache. Right now it's only 1x SATA3 SSD which means it will top at 500MB/s (so slightly less than a half of 10GbE) and I am planning to add one more which will make it almost saturate a 10GbE link. Additionally yep, I plan to have one NVMe dataset sometime this year. And even further, I plan to add a few enterprise HDDs in stripe and mirror. If you have 8 (with capacity of 4 for full mirroring) and each is at 260MB/s then et voila, you get 10GbE again.
- jjoonathan 5y agoIf somebody knows why they should pay a premium for 10GbE, they also know how bad spinning rust is.
- seized 5y agoThose same people should also know that spinning rust can go very fast as well... My 8 and 12 drive spinning rust pools can read at 500MB/sec easily and get close to GB/sec. But the 10Gbit network is there for the flash pool.
- aseipp 5y agoYeah, but... The noise! I just can't handle spinning rust anymore for this alone even if the $/GB ratio is still so much better. Consumer SATA SSDs are plentiful enough that I'm just going all in on flash when I revamp my server and do an 8 drive (+1 hotswap) RAID10 build or whatever. I don't need +60TB or anything and 8-9 drives is about the limit you can find on high end consumer mobos I think...
- justsomehnguy 5y ago> The noise It is not required for the NAS to be in the same room where you sleep. With a proper drives (and maybe some APM tinkering) you can make a very quiet one. Also using 2.5" drives is an option too. Though if you can throw money at the problem than of course you can just buy a bunch of TB SSD drives.
- fomine3 5y agoOr say 1Gbps is too low bar. Even single rust drive can fill 1GbE in simple workload.
- pdimitar 5y agoPut 8 high-quality HDDs in a stripe & mirror config. Thus you can read from 4 simultaneously. They each top at 260MB/s. That amounts to little over 1GB/s -- which is 10GbE.