PCI SSD Options

Status
Not open for further replies.

kspare

Guru
Joined
Feb 19, 2015
Messages
508
I wasn't budget sensitive when I bought the cpus, I thought they were good lol I do notice on boot that my memory isn't running at 1866mhz. What cpu's would you recommend to upgrade to?

But like I said right now everything is working really well but as we fill it up it's going to slow down and I want to keep performance high, so i'm not reluctant to put new cpu's, more memory and the pci 3700 ssd in this beast! I want it to perform!
 

kspare

Guru
Joined
Feb 19, 2015
Messages
508
Why does it look hurty? What would you want to see?
 

kspare

Guru
Joined
Feb 19, 2015
Messages
508
right now my cpu doesn't go very high, it htis 20% on backup days, which is late at night. we're able to saturate three LTO4 drives. like I said performance today isn't bad at all and i'm a planner lol
 

Mlovelace

Guru
Joined
Aug 19, 2014
Messages
1,111
I wasn't budget sensitive when I bought the cpus, I thought they were good lol I do notice on boot that my memory isn't running at 1866mhz. What cpu's would you recommend to upgrade to?

But like I said right now everything is working really well but as we fill it up it's going to slow down and I want to keep performance high, so i'm not reluctant to put new cpu's, more memory and the pci 3700 ssd in this beast! I want it to perform!
I would start at the E5-2630v2 and go up from there depending on the budget.
 

jgreco

Resident Grinch
Joined
May 29, 2011
Messages
18,680
I wasn't budget sensitive when I bought the cpus, I thought they were good lol I do notice on boot that my memory isn't running at 1866mhz. What cpu's would you recommend to upgrade to?

But like I said right now everything is working really well but as we fill it up it's going to slow down and I want to keep performance high, so i'm not reluctant to put new cpu's, more memory and the pci 3700 ssd in this beast! I want it to perform!

Yeah, well, the 2603v2 is a crummy low end CPU. It's basically there for people who want E5-class memory capacity but who don't need processing power. Max memory speed is 1333.

The ideal CPU for a NAS has a smallish number of fast cores - in my opinion. I don't feel there's anything to be had from dual socket unless you really need extra CPU oomph, or extra memory, or extra I/O capacity.

So for my VM filer here, I deliberately went single socket. Supermicro X10SRW, E5-1650V3. Gives me five full height full length PCIe slots, the ability to do 128GB at full 2133 speed (or 256GB at somewhat less speed). No compromises. The CPU is only about $500, compared to the similar E5-26xx one that's about 3x that.

But if the 2603's are doing your work and doing it well, don't get obsessed. Especially if you have multiple hosts and two of those 2603's, that might be enough spreading-of-the-load that it isn't a problem. If I was buying new E5-26xx v2, I'd be looking at the E5-2637v2 or the E5-2643v2. Lower number of cores but higher frequency usually means better performance for NAS.

There are so many factors to consider in these things, though. For example, it might make sense to upgrade hard drives to increase pool free space if that's gotten fragmented.
 

kspare

Guru
Joined
Feb 19, 2015
Messages
508
I think getting a cpu that would let the memory run at it's proper speed would also make a big difference. These are all great tips! I think if i'm going to add more memory it would make sense to get proper cpu's in there to have the memory running at proper speeds. and then the pci 3700 would come next and then I think it's a pretty sweet box for hosting terminal servers.

We currently have 26 vm's on it. Running about 50 hosted users. so far so good!
 

jgreco

Resident Grinch
Joined
May 29, 2011
Messages
18,680
I think getting a cpu that would let the memory run at it's proper speed would also make a big difference.

Nah, don't get obsessed. There's always a way to improve. The speed of modern memory subsystems is so much greater than the I/O capacity of your machine. Your 1333 is capable of around 10GBytes/sec.

An improved SLOG device is more likely to give it a noticeable increase of zippiness. Just opinion, but...
 

Bidule0hm

Server Electronics Sorcerer
Joined
Aug 5, 2013
Messages
3,710
That looks hurty to me. Where's @Bidule0hm when he's needed?

I'm here, I'm here :D

So, it's stats analysis and as all stats analysis in the IT realm it's more an art than anything else, there isn't a definitive answer...

But, as far as I can tell, this server has a too small ARC so it'll benefit of more RAM. These stats are after some hours/days of cache warm-up, right?

What are the stats under the same workload but right after a reboot?

Edit: As you ask why: I can tell that because of the low hit ratio and the low hit MFU:MRU ratio.
 
Last edited:

diehard

Contributor
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
162
The Intel 750 just "released" today..

NVMe with good performance and full power loss protection, including in-flight data.

This reeeeeally intrigures me for an SLOG
 

jgreco

Resident Grinch
Joined
May 29, 2011
Messages
18,680
The Intel 750 just "released" today..

NVMe with good performance and full power loss protection, including in-flight data.

This reeeeeally intrigures me for an SLOG

Holy shit. How'd I totally miss that?

Wonder when we'll see availability.
 

jgreco

Resident Grinch
Joined
May 29, 2011
Messages
18,680
Holy shit. How'd I totally miss that?

Wonder when we'll see availability.

4/24 , you lazy bastard. Get off your duff and look on NewEgg. $469.

See, and now, here again, Intel screws me. I had been contemplating a P3700 for a SLOG device. But our write levels here are fairly low... probably fit just fine within half of that rated 70GB/day. And at that price point, it would be attractive for an L2ARC device as well.

AAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.
 

kspare

Guru
Joined
Feb 19, 2015
Messages
508
i was thinking about the 400gb for a l2 and the 1.2tb for slog. not for the size but because the bigger one has much faster write times.
 

jgreco

Resident Grinch
Joined
May 29, 2011
Messages
18,680
i was thinking about the 400gb for a l2 and the 1.2tb for slog. not for the size but because the bigger one has much faster write times.

It does? Are you sure?

The key here is latency. At least over in the P3700 realm, where latency is listed by ARK, the difference between the top-of-the-line 2.0TB PCIe version and the entry level 400GB version is 0us: both are rated at 20us. Yes, the sequential write speeds of the high end are faster at 1900MB/s and 175K IOPS, compared to the 1080MB/s and 75K IOPS on the low end.

Since what you're really concerned with for SLOG is the latency, the only real difference is that if you have a large number of IOPS or MB/s coming in, you could start to see latency bump up as the thing got too-busy. But 1080MB/s is still approximately a full 10GbE.

I am guessing that the same may be true for the 750's.
 

kspare

Guru
Joined
Feb 19, 2015
Messages
508
true but for the price its hard not to do it that way with the 750!
 

jgreco

Resident Grinch
Joined
May 29, 2011
Messages
18,680
I'm here, I'm here :D

Thanks for the house call...

But, as far as I can tell, this server has a too small ARC so it'll benefit of more RAM. These stats are after some hours/days of cache warm-up, right?

What are the stats under the same workload but right after a reboot?

Edit: As you ask why: I can tell that because of the low hit ratio and the low hit MFU:MRU ratio.

That was about what I thought too.
 

jgreco

Resident Grinch
Joined
May 29, 2011
Messages
18,680
true but for the price its hard not to do it that way with the 750!

Well, money saved on one thing can be spent on another.

For you, my guess would be that having a few of those 530's as L2ARC would be awesome, and yes, a nice SLOG device would be good. But I would think you'd see more of an improvement from a boost to your machine's basic stats (memory, CPU) and that the differential in cost between those two new PCIe options would be better spent addressing the basic stats.
 

ser_rhaegar

Patron
Joined
Feb 2, 2014
Messages
358

kspare

Guru
Joined
Feb 19, 2015
Messages
508
wouldn't you want low latency and high write speeds for slog? you are downplaying write speed vs latency?
 

kspare

Guru
Joined
Feb 19, 2015
Messages
508
I'm here, I'm here :D

So, it's stats analysis and as all stats analysis in the IT realm it's more an art than anything else, there isn't a definitive answer...

But, as far as I can tell, this server has a too small ARC so it'll benefit of more RAM. These stats are after some hours/days of cache warm-up, right?

What are the stats under the same workload but right after a reboot?

Edit: As you ask why: I can tell that because of the low hit ratio and the low hit MFU:MRU ratio.

correct those stats are after s few days.

how can i pull stats on the l2arc? i wonder if its worth it or not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top