Not only are some writes different (slower) to the (better?) machine ... but when also running slower:
They don't do that prototypical TrueNAS speed shuffle that's typical of performance constrained by HD limits.
TrueNAS Configs:
Common to Both TN Servers:
(I think that any / all system-differences constitute upgrades within the 80TB array)
Some transfers (on both) get down to a range of KB/sec. (which is even less than 6x IOPS min. Is that still an IOPS limit?).
(the above test was the only instance in which I'm speaking of files that were apps, or small files, etc.)
Attempts to Remedy Performance Disparities:
Recreated Pool with 1mb Records -- (no help).
Ensured all settings were identical when recreating Pool.
All tests Performed:
• Via same network
• From same source
• Of same data
• To (near) identical machines:
Writing same Data to both:
• to 32TB ( –SLOG) zVol: 350 - 550 MB/sec
• to 80TB ( +SLOG) zVol: 171 - 181 MB/sec
Reading same Data to both:
• to 32TB ( –SLOG) zVol: 400 - 600 MB/sec
• to 80TB ( +SLOG) zVol: 550 - 800 MB/sec
Are these HBAs: Dell H200 HBA vs LSI 9208i ...roughly equivalent performers..?
Testing, Day 2:
Thanks, and I hope I've provided adequate info.
They don't do that prototypical TrueNAS speed shuffle that's typical of performance constrained by HD limits.
TrueNAS Configs:
Ver: TrueNAS Core 12.0 u7
Vol: RAIDz2 (8 devs)
Cfg: Dedupe (never enabled)
Cfg: Dataset type: SMB
I believe all settings are identical
Common to Both TN Servers:
Dell PowerEdge T320 Server
CPU: (1) E5-2430v2 6c, (HT) - 2.5GHz | 3.3GHz (Turbo)
RAM: (6) 8GB PC3-10600R | 48GB 1333MHz
HDD: (8) HGST UltraStar SAS 7,200rpm (not shingled)
NIC: (1) SFP+ 10Gb Network card
Testing Client:16" MBPr i9, 32GB, 4TB PCIe SSD
OS : MacOS Monterey
NIC: Sonnet - SFP+ (10GbE) to TB3
(unlikely bottleneck - Sonnet SFP+ has been working excellently)
(I think that any / all system-differences constitute upgrades within the 80TB array)
80TB Unit (Slower Writes + Faster Reads) | 32TB Unit (Slower Reads + Faster Writes) | |
Installed RAM | 48 GB 1333MHz ECC | 48 GB 1333MHz ECC |
SLOG / Intent Log | Radian 8GB RMS-200 | None |
8x HGST 7,2K (UltraStar) | 10TB IBM (IBM-ESXS HUH721010AL4200) | 4TB (HGST HUS726040AL4214) |
SAS Controller | Dell H200 HBA SAS 2 | LSI 9200i SAS Card |
Some transfers (on both) get down to a range of KB/sec. (which is even less than 6x IOPS min. Is that still an IOPS limit?).
(the above test was the only instance in which I'm speaking of files that were apps, or small files, etc.)
Attempts to Remedy Performance Disparities:
Recreated Pool with 1mb Records -- (no help).
Ensured all settings were identical when recreating Pool.
All tests Performed:
• Via same network
• From same source
• Of same data
• To (near) identical machines:
Writing same Data to both:
• to 32TB ( –SLOG) zVol: 350 - 550 MB/sec
• to 80TB ( +SLOG) zVol: 171 - 181 MB/sec
Reading same Data to both:
• to 32TB ( –SLOG) zVol: 400 - 600 MB/sec
• to 80TB ( +SLOG) zVol: 550 - 800 MB/sec
Are these HBAs: Dell H200 HBA vs LSI 9208i ...roughly equivalent performers..?
Testing, Day 2:
Write of all large-video files to the 32 TB hovers @ ~ 95mb/s ( ±5 mb/sec)
Write of all large-video files to the 80 TB hovers @ ~ 165mb/s ( ±5 mb/sec)
(though both are from the same source they're both performed exclusively)
Reports Dashboard:
Not working on either system
(Though, Dashboard still provide some info on both ..?)
Additional Steps / Tests:
Install TrueNAS Scale (via SATADOM to test differences from Core vs Scale)
All 'Data Sets' were configured (or reconfigured) as 'SMB networks' and shared as SMB...
This choice was made because I'd been told that "SMB is a superior protocol / faster" (perhaps in TrueNAS / FreeNAS) by a mod; still true?
Thanks, and I hope I've provided adequate info.
Last edited: