Slow write performance with RAID10 configurations for 1282T3

Questions about SNMP, Power, System, Logs, disk, & RAID.
robinqu
New here
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2017 7:57 pm

Re: Slow write performance with RAID10 configurations for 1282T3

Postby robinqu » Wed Nov 01, 2017 12:39 pm

well, I clearly read your satisfaction of QNAP products.

BTW, since the TX-800P is via thunderbolt and supports daisy chain, I assume it's possible for any other native thunderbolt storage device?

Bob Zelin wrote:ok, more of my smart ** comments -
QNAP writes on one of my favorite QNAP products - the TVS-EC1680U
"Built-in 10GbE, up to 3,800+ MB/s throughput and 268,000+ IOPS for breakthrough performance"
My friend, you could not get 3800 MB/sec with 16 7200 RPM SATA drives if your life depended on it. This is the performance with SSD's.
And when this spec was written, I believe that 2TB and 4TB SSD's were not even available. So (at the time) when 1TB SSD's were $1000 each, exactly who is going to spend $16,000
for SSD's plus the cost of the TVS-EC1680U to do 4K editing ? No one, exactly - not for 16 TB of storage, when you can buy 10TB 7200 RPM SATA drives for $349 a piece.

THIS is called ADVERTISING and Marketing. The same marketing that "high end video companies" do, when they charge $40,000 - $80,000 for their 64 TB Shared storage systems, that do less than
a QNAP (or Synology). Many of the video dealers must make a $10,000 - $20,000 profit to be successful. The Chinese companies do not work this way.
And this is why 40 Gig Ethernet is a fantasy these days. If you put a Mellanox 40G card into a Win 10 PC (like an Asus Motherboard Win 10 PC) - you will get 2200 MB/sec bandwidth to a 40G Server (the
TVS-EC1680U from QNAP takes the Mellanox 40G card). So let's get this straight - you get 2200 MB/sec on your client because you have a 40G connection, but the TOTAL bandwidth of the QNAP with SSD's
is 3800 MB/sec. So you are going to build a system like for 2 users ? This is why 40G is so unrealistic today (unless you have 200 1G clients, and the 40G is your backplane for a bunch of stacked switches).
And Please let me be clear - on the RED Camera website - http://www.red.com/tools/recording-time
the new 8K RED Monstro 8K full format at 24p at 8:1 compression is 162 MB/sec. So why is 600 - 800 MB/sec with a normal 10G card not good enough? (your 350 MB/sec is WRITE speed - not READ speed, which is more than
twice this number).
Bottom line - the QNAP product line is PERFECT for HD, 4K, 6K AND 8K video editing of RED and Arri files (and everything else).

Bob Zelin
ps - and for the record, I have been installing QNAP systems since May 2015, and in the couple of hundred systems I have installed, I have NEVER seen a QNAP die (drives fail, but not the QNAP).

User avatar
storageman
Experience counts
Posts: 3555
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 10:57 pm

Re: Slow write performance with RAID10 configurations for 1282T3

Postby storageman » Wed Nov 01, 2017 9:06 pm

Why "assume"???
Good luck with using unsupported hardware!

Bob Zelin
Easy as a breeze
Posts: 255
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2016 12:55 am
Location: Orlando, FL.
Contact:

Re: Slow write performance with RAID10 configurations for 1282T3

Postby Bob Zelin » Thu Nov 02, 2017 12:10 am

you mean that you possibly own a Promise R8, or G-Tech Studio XL, and want to know if you can plug this in and use it as additional storage (instead of a QNAP TX-800P) ?
Simple answer -
NO. It won't work.

Bob Zelin
Bob Zelin / Rescue 1, Inc.
http://www.bobzelin.com

robinqu
New here
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2017 7:57 pm

Re: Slow write performance with RAID10 configurations for 1282T3

Postby robinqu » Thu Nov 02, 2017 11:10 pm

Fantastic!
I really miss my hackintosh days.

P3R
Ask me anything
Posts: 9984
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 1:39 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden (UTC+01:00)

Re: Slow write performance with RAID10 configurations for 1282T3

Postby P3R » Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:26 am

robinqu wrote:I really miss my hackintosh days.
In this case you have the same vendor lock-in so I fail to understand what you could miss? :wink:
RAID have never ever been a replacement for backups. Without backups on a different system (preferably placed at another site), you will eventually lose data!

A non-RAID configuration (including RAID 0, which isn't really RAID) with a backup on a separate media protects your data far better than any RAID-volume without backup.

All data storage consists of both the primary storage and the backups. It's your money and your data, spend the storage budget wisely or pay with your data!

Bob Zelin
Easy as a breeze
Posts: 255
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2016 12:55 am
Location: Orlando, FL.
Contact:

Re: Slow write performance with RAID10 configurations for 1282T3

Postby Bob Zelin » Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:47 am

I know I am "beating a dead horse" with this older thread, but I just saw it again (searching for 40G comments), and I re read the comment on "I really miss my hackintosh days", which was inspired by us saying that you can your your existing thunderbolt Promise or G-Tech on the QNAP as additional storage. P3R commented "you have the same vendor lock in, so I fail to understand what you could miss".
My reply is - EXACTLY. In your Hackintosh system, you had a choice of three RAID host cards - ATTO R680, Areca ARC 1882 (and 1883) and the Highpoint Rocket RAID. THATS IT. There are no other hardware raid cards for the Mac. This is Vendor Lock in. And your empty RAID chassis boxes from iStorage Pro, Areca, ProAvio, etc. all cost the same amount of money as a 1282T3 - and the QNAP TX-800P is a third of the price of an empty miniSAS RAID enclosure. So what's to miss ? In the "old days" (pre macOS 10.13 High Sierra) you could have setup your Promise R8, G-Tech GRACK as a shared storage system with a Mac running OS X Server, but now Apple has ruined 10.13 Server, and that ain't happening anymore.

Bob Zelin
Bob Zelin / Rescue 1, Inc.
http://www.bobzelin.com

nick314
Starting out
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2017 5:49 pm

Re: Slow write performance with RAID10 configurations for 1282T3

Postby nick314 » Fri Jan 05, 2018 4:00 am

In case this is still an issue for you, today I formatted my system to the latest High Sierra, and speeds jumped from 250mb/s to 800mb/s via Thunderbolt 3. (Raid-6, Static, 8x 7200rpm drives). Perhaps its a bug with Apple, or a software (like paragon) that might interfere?

ritch
New here
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2018 12:23 am

Re: Slow write performance with RAID10 configurations for 1282T3

Postby ritch » Fri Sep 14, 2018 11:51 am

I am having g same problem - with the T3 connection I'm getting 260MB/s write and 1100MB/s read. I'm on an iMac Pro.

It's set up with 8 10TB SATA and 4 500GB ssd in a cache on a static raid 10. I've read here and other places to try 10GB connection but it's the same
write speed but only 300MB/s read!!

I'm pretty much feeling like this machine is way to slow for the amount it cost

Can anyone suggest a way to get above 800MB/s write speeds with this?

thanks in advance

ritch
New here
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2018 12:23 am

Re: Slow write performance with RAID10 configurations for 1282T3

Postby ritch » Fri Sep 14, 2018 11:53 am

nick314 wrote:In case this is still an issue for you, today I formatted my system to the latest High Sierra, and speeds jumped from 250mb/s to 800mb/s via Thunderbolt 3. (Raid-6, Static, 8x 7200rpm drives). Perhaps its a bug with Apple, or a software (like paragon) that might interfere?



I've had high sierra and it's latest updates and still don't have good speed - Raid 10 with Ssd cache - did you update the Qnap firmware?

P3R
Ask me anything
Posts: 9984
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 1:39 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden (UTC+01:00)

Re: Slow write performance with RAID10 configurations for 1282T3

Postby P3R » Fri Sep 14, 2018 2:04 pm

ritch wrote:It's set up with 8 10TB SATA and 4 500GB ssd in a cache on a static raid 10.
First try with a disabled cache. If that doesn't help, switch to RAID 6 as that is what you have different. With an 8-disk array, RAID 6 is faster than RAID 10 for sequential access (which I suppose you're doing) with a fast CPU. As a bonus you will get more storage and better reliability.
RAID have never ever been a replacement for backups. Without backups on a different system (preferably placed at another site), you will eventually lose data!

A non-RAID configuration (including RAID 0, which isn't really RAID) with a backup on a separate media protects your data far better than any RAID-volume without backup.

All data storage consists of both the primary storage and the backups. It's your money and your data, spend the storage budget wisely or pay with your data!

ritch
New here
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2018 12:23 am

Re: Slow write performance with RAID10 configurations for 1282T3

Postby ritch » Fri Sep 14, 2018 8:55 pm

I've read in another thread the MTU to 9000 (jumbo frames?) increases the speeds. I'm not able to figure out how to do this to see a difference.
Is there someone that knows the steps to configure this? From what I've read, the snap is getting bogged somewhere and maybe settings internally can
free up some speed.

Btw - everything I read until now said RAID 10 is faster and more reliable than RAID 5 or 6...maybe no?

User avatar
storageman
Experience counts
Posts: 3555
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 10:57 pm

Re: Slow write performance with RAID10 configurations for 1282T3

Postby storageman » Fri Sep 14, 2018 9:04 pm

ritch wrote:I've read in another thread the MTU to 9000 (jumbo frames?) increases the speeds. I'm not able to figure out how to do this to see a difference.
Is there someone that knows the steps to configure this? From what I've read, the snap is getting bogged somewhere and maybe settings internally can
free up some speed.

Btw - everything I read until now said RAID 10 is faster and more reliable than RAID 5 or 6...maybe no?


There's a lot of rubbish on the internet, don't believe everything you read!
On a dual controller SAN RAID 10 maybe faster but on a single controller NAS RAID 5 is definitely faster if not RAID 6 too for sequential IO.
RAID 10 will speed up random performance/IOPs but at the expense of seq IO.
These boxes are quicker at writing parity than they are at mirroring data.
As for resilience the order is:
RAID 5 1 disk
RAID 10 2 disks if each fail from either side of the mirror, and 1 disk if both fail from the same side of the mirror!
RAID 6 guaranteed (guaranteed!) 2 disk protection

Here endeth the lesson!

But test it yourself.

Jumbo frames change on NAS, switch and PC
https://routerguide.net/jumbo-frame-on-or-off/

User avatar
Trexx
Experience counts
Posts: 4155
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 7:50 am
Location: Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Slow write performance with RAID10 configurations for 1282T3

Postby Trexx » Fri Sep 14, 2018 10:23 pm

storageman wrote:Jumbo frames change on NAS, switch and PC
https://routerguide.net/jumbo-frame-on-or-off/


Or if you have it direct wired from your Mac to your NAS, just jumbo frames on your NAS interface (only the one direct wired) and your PC.
Paul

Model: TS-877-1600 FW: 4.3.5.x
QTier (HDD): [RAID-5] 6 x 3TB HGST DeskStar NAS QTier (SSD): [RAID-1] 2 x 525GB Crucial MX300 m.2's
(SSD): [RAID-1] 2 x 500GB Evo 860
RAM: Kingston HyperX Fury 32GB Kit DDR4-2666
GPU: EVGA GTX 1060, ACX 2.0(1 Fan), 6GB
UPS: CyberPower AVR1350 Ext. Backup: USB 3.0 Seagate 5TB
Media Boxes: Nvidia ShieldTV Pro, AppleTV 4, Roku Stick

Model: TVS-673 32GB FW: 4.3.5.x Test/Backup Box
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAS RAID Rebuild Times | Live QTS Videos | | QNAP NAS Guide | Information needed when you ask for HELP | QNAP Links, Tutorials, etc.
2018 Plex NAS Compatibility Guide | QNAP Plex FAQ | Moogle's QNAP Faq


Return to “System & Disk Volume Management”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests