[nas-2000] Re: Poor performance ?

  • From: Julius Loman <lomo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: nas-2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 23:00:00 +0200

On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 10:01:41PM +0200, philipp Wehrheim <flipstar@xxxxxxx> 
wrote:
> sure
> 
> by the way today i visited the kiss webpage the kiss 1600 looks cool
> but my question is what exectly can you do with the kissdx
> and dos the kiss support upnp(av)?
well, first upnp is buggy in kissdx and works only with few upnp servers
(twokymedia is only the one i found working), second - with kiss using
upnp you don't have subtitles.
kissdx does some other features that are not available on kiss, like
playing dvd from dvdfiles and so on...
and also upnp is not available on older kiss players i think.
for anybody not having kiss its just a binary data junk :)
> thanks
> flip
> 
> Julius Loman schrieb:
> > On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 09:32:32PM +0200, philipp Wehrheim 
> > <flipstar@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> there are now 2 new ipk's lsof and strace ...
> > could you add the kissdx and relevant packages to your web please ? just
> > if somebody is interested.
> > 
> > i've sent you an email two days ago with the link -
> > http://lomo.kyberia.net/nas2000/.
> > 
> > regards
> > julius
> >> philipp Wehrheim schrieb:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> today I did some stacing and compared tinky's and raidsonic's proftp
> >>> work.
> >>>
> >>> when running proftp (the same binary) on tinky it looks like this.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ................
> >>> time(NULL)                              = 67811881
> >>> alarm(219)                              = 0
> >>> write(11, "\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0"...,
> >>> 8192) = 8192
> >>> gettimeofday({67811881, 150000}, NULL)  = 0
> >>> select(14, [13], [], NULL, {1, 0})      = 1 (in [13], left {1, 0})
> >>> read(13, "\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0"...,
> >>> 8192) = 8192
> >>> alarm(0)                                = 219
> >>> time(NULL)                              = 67811881
> >>> time(NULL)                              = 67811881
> >>> alarm(219)                              = 0
> >>> alarm(0)                                = 219
> >>> time(NULL)                              = 67811881
> >>> time(NULL)                              = 67811881
> >>> alarm(219)                              = 0
> >>> write(11, "\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0"...,
> >>> 8192) = 8192
> >>> gettimeofday({67811881, 510000}, NULL)  = 0
> >>> select(14, [13], [], NULL, {1, 0})      = 1 (in [13], left {1, 0})
> >>> read(13, "\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0"...,
> >>> 8192) = 8192
> >>> alarm(0)                                = 219
> >>> time(NULL)                              = 67811881
> >>> time(NULL)                              = 67811881
> >>> alarm(219)                              = 0
> >>> alarm(0)                                = 219
> >>> time(NULL)                              = 67811881
> >>> time(NULL)                              = 67811881
> >>> .............
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> and on the raidsonic fw like this
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ...............
> >>> time(NULL)                              = 101373
> >>>
> >>> alarm(72)                               = 0
> >>>
> >>> alarm(0)                                = 72
> >>>
> >>> time(NULL)                              = 101373
> >>>
> >>> time(NULL)                              = 101373
> >>>
> >>> alarm(72)                               = 0
> >>>
> >>> sendfile64(9, 11, [193131480], 4294967295) = 65536
> >>>
> >>> alarm(0)                                = 72
> >>>
> >>> time(NULL)                              = 101373
> >>>
> >>> time(NULL)                              = 101373
> >>>
> >>> alarm(72)                               = 0
> >>>
> >>> alarm(0)                                = 72
> >>>
> >>> time(NULL)                              = 101373
> >>>
> >>> time(NULL)                              = 101374
> >>>
> >>> alarm(72)                               = 0
> >>>
> >>> sendfile64(9, 11, [193164248], 4294967295) = 65536
> >>>
> >>> alarm(0)                                = 72
> >>>
> >>> time(NULL)                              = 101374
> >>>
> >>> time(NULL)                              = 101374
> >>>
> >>> alarm(72)                               = 0
> >>>
> >>> alarm(0)                                = 72
> >>> .................
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> to me it looks like the reads and write proftpd is doing when executed
> >>> on tinky eats up lots of time ....
> >>>
> >>> Im not sure here it comes from ...
> >>>
> >>> Anybody having an idea?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Aurelien schrieb:
> >>>> Good Mornin' everybody !
> >>>>
> >>>> Here are mine. they are very poor and i'm still investigating to find
> >>>> some answers....
> >>>>
> >>>> Firmware:  tinky-2_3_2-mu-02.2.tgz
> >>>> <http://www.nas-2000.org/download/tinky-2_3_2_mu_02/tinky-2_3_2-mu-02.2.tgz>
> >>>>
> >>>> FTP:
> >>>>    Up: 1.5MB/S
> >>>>    Down: 1.8MB/S (==> 2.3MB/S with initial proftpd.conf file)
> >>>> SMB:
> >>>>    Up: 1.5MB/S
> >>>>    Down: 1.8MB/S
> >>>> File System:
> >>>>    Ext3 (400GB)
> >>>> Drive test results:
> >>>>    root@NASDRIVE:~ # hdparm -tT /dev/hda1
> >>>>    /dev/hda1:
> >>>>     Timing buffer-cache reads:   124 MB in  2.04 seconds =  60.78 MB/sec
> >>>>     Timing buffered disk reads:   26 MB in  3.00 seconds =   8.67 MB/sec
> >>>> Computer OS:
> >>>>    XP, same results with ubuntu live cd
> >>>> Network:
> >>>>    NASBOX / LINKSYS WRT54G / ETHERNET
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>   philipp Wehrheim a écrit :
> >>>>> Hi everybody,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> here is my proftpd bechmark:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I used a 200M file created with
> >>>>>
> >>>>> dd if=/dev/zero of=./200M_file bs=1M count=200
> >>>>>
> >>>>> When I did these test samba, nfs and well yes proftd where running.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> for tinky-2.3.2-mu-02.2 I get this results:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> upload
> >>>>> time ncftpput -u admin -p admin 192.168.10.100 . ./200M_file
> >>>>> ./200M_file:                         200.00 MB    2.83 MB/s
> >>>>>
> >>>>> real    1m11.035s
> >>>>> user    0m0.056s
> >>>>> sys     0m1.140s
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> download
> >>>>> time ncftpget -u admin -p admin 192.168.10.100 . ./200M_file
> >>>>> 200M_file:                           200.00 MB    5.83 MB/s
> >>>>>
> >>>>> real    0m34.539s
> >>>>> user    0m0.400s
> >>>>> sys     0m4.956s
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> for raidsonic fw 2_3_2-IB-2
> >>>>>
> >>>>> upload
> >>>>> time ncftpput -u admin -p admin 192.168.10.99 . ./200M_file
> >>>>> ./200M_file:                         200.00 MB    5.65 MB/s
> >>>>>
> >>>>> real    0m35.999s
> >>>>> user    0m0.072s
> >>>>> sys     0m0.984s
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> download
> >>>>> time ncftpget -u admin -p admin 192.168.10.99 . ./200M_file
> >>>>> 200M_file:                           200.00 MB    4.23 MB/s
> >>>>>
> >>>>> real    0m47.516s
> >>>>> user    0m0.456s
> >>>>> sys     0m4.844s
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So I think Tinky is doing quite well when it comes to download
> >>>>> but is very slow with uploads.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Running proftd -V on the tinky fw
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Features:
> >>>>>     + Autoshadow support
> >>>>>     + Controls support
> >>>>>     + curses support
> >>>>>     - Developer support
> >>>>>     - DSO support
> >>>>>     - IPv6 support
> >>>>>     + Largefile support
> >>>>>     + ncurses support
> >>>>>     - POSIX ACL support
> >>>>>     + Shadow file support
> >>>>>     + Sendfile support
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   Tunable Options:
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_BUFFER_SIZE = 1024
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_GLOBBING_MAX = 8
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_HASH_TABLE_SIZE = 40
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_NEW_POOL_SIZE = 512
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_RCVBUFSZ = 87380
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_SCOREBOARD_BUFFER_SIZE = 80
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_SCOREBOARD_SCRUB_TIMER = 30
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_SELECT_TIMEOUT = 30
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_SNDBUFSZ = 16384
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTIDENT = 10
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTIDLE = 600
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTLINGER = 180
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTLOGIN = 300
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTNOXFER = 300
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTSTALLED = 3600
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_XFER_BUFFER_SIZE = 16384
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_XFER_SCOREBOARD_UPDATES = 10
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> and running proftd -V on 2_3_2-IB-2
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   Features:
> >>>>>     + Autoshadow support
> >>>>>     - Controls support
> >>>>>     + curses support
> >>>>>     - Developer support
> >>>>>     - DSO support
> >>>>>     - IPv6 support
> >>>>>     + Largefile support
> >>>>>     + ncurses support
> >>>>>     - POSIX ACL support
> >>>>>     + Shadow file support
> >>>>>     + Sendfile support
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   Tunable Options:
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_BUFFER_SIZE = 1024
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_GLOBBING_MAX = 8
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_HASH_TABLE_SIZE = 40
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_NEW_POOL_SIZE = 512
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_RCVBUFSZ = 8192
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_SCOREBOARD_BUFFER_SIZE = 80
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_SCOREBOARD_SCRUB_TIMER = 30
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_SELECT_TIMEOUT = 30
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_SNDBUFSZ = 8192
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTIDENT = 10
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTIDLE = 600
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTLINGER = 180
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTLOGIN = 300
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTNOXFER = 300
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTSTALLED = 3600
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_XFER_BUFFER_SIZE = 1024
> >>>>>     PR_TUNABLE_XFER_SCOREBOARD_UPDATES = 10
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Further more the tinky proftpd has support (modules) for dyndns,
> >>>>> shaper and ctrls (see proftpd -vv) which the 2_3_2-IB-2 has not.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'll change the RCVBUFSZ to the size of SNDBUFSZ and we
> >>>>> should discuss which modules are really needed for the ftp.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -- 
> >>>>> regards
> >>>>> flip
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Aurel schrieb:
> >>>>>  
> >>>>>> Can you send us your proftpd.conf file !
> >>>>>> Indeed with mine, transfers are limited to 1.5M/s !
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Selon Julius Loman <lomo@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>    
> >>>>>>> On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 01:37:46PM +0200, Julius Loman
> >>>>>>> <lomo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>      
> >>>>>>>> On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 12:13:05PM +0200, Aurel <massman@xxxxxxx>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>        
> >>>>>>>>> Can you give us the FTP speed levels as well for information?
> >>>>>>>>>           
> >>>>>>>> ftp is ok (but was not working out-of-box, beacuse of unknown
> >>>>>>>> directive
> >>>>>>>> in configuration file)
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> measured on 100MB file with wget: 6.92M/s
> >>>>>>>>         
> >>>>>>> further testing gives me slightly better speeds when i mount the share
> >>>>>>> on my linux laptop with cifs instead of smbfs (about 2.9 MB/s)
> >>>>>>> when accessing from windows, it is the same as with smbfs (1.7MB/s)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> could you guys post your smb.conf you have on your nas ? i haven't
> >>>>>>> touched mine yet, but i want a comparision - just to be sure
> >>>>>>>      
> >>>>>>>>> Selon Julius Loman <lomo@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>          
> >>>>>>>>>> Hi everybody
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I'm using tinky-2_3_2-mu-02.2 and I've got quite poor throughtput
> >>>>>>>>>> via
> >>>>>>>>>> SMB, only about 1.4MB/sec upload to NAS and about 1.9MB/sec
> >>>>>>>>>> download.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> When doing download/upload operations - top shows me that smbd is
> >>>>>>>>>>             
> >>>>>>> eating
> >>>>>>>      
> >>>>>>>>>> ~95% cpu and i receive many software interrups (si value in top is
> >>>>>>>>>> ~34%).
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Do you have such poor throughtput as well or do I have some shitty
> >>>>>>>>>> piece of hardware ? (Maybe slower CPU than you ?) I expected a lot
> >>>>>>>>>>             
> >>>>>>> more.
> >>>>>>>      
> >>>>>>>>>> FYI - dma is turned on and I didn't measure performance with
> >>>>>>>>>> original
> >>>>>>>>>> firmware, because I've overwritten it with tinky in the same hour 
> >>>>>>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>>>>             
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>      
> >>>>>>>>>> box arrived.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Here is my cpuinfo:
> >>>>>>>>>> Processor       : FA52Xid(wb) rev 1 (v4l)
> >>>>>>>>>> BogoMIPS        : 69.83
> >>>>>>>>>> Features        : swp half thumb
> >>>>>>>>>> CPU implementer : 0x66
> >>>>>>>>>> CPU architecture: 4
> >>>>>>>>>> CPU variant     : 0x0
> >>>>>>>>>> CPU part        : 0x526
> >>>>>>>>>> CPU revision    : 1
> >>>>>>>>>> Cache type      : write-back
> >>>>>>>>>> Cache clean     : cp15 c7 ops
> >>>>>>>>>> Cache lockdown  : format B
> >>>>>>>>>> Cache format    : Harvard
> >>>>>>>>>> I size          : 8192
> >>>>>>>>>> I assoc         : 2
> >>>>>>>>>> I line length   : 16
> >>>>>>>>>> I sets          : 256
> >>>>>>>>>> D size          : 4096
> >>>>>>>>>> D assoc         : 2
> >>>>>>>>>> D line length   : 16
> >>>>>>>>>> D sets          : 128
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Hardware        : Sword sl2312
> >>>>>>>>>> Revision        : 0000
> >>>>>>>>>> Serial          : 0000000000000000
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> -- 
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> [ Julius Loman ][ lomo@xxxxxxxxxxx ][ http://lomo.kyberia.net ][
> >>>>>>>>>>             
> >>>>>>> icq:35732873
> >>>>>>>      
> >>>>>>>>>> ]
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>             
> >>>>>>>>> -- 
> >>>>>>>>> Aurel le bel homme
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>           
> >>>>>>>> -- 
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> [ Julius Loman ][ lomo@xxxxxxxxxxx ][ http://lomo.kyberia.net ][
> >>>>>>>>         
> >>>>>>> icq:35732873 ]
> >>>>>>> -- 
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> [ Julius Loman ][ lomo@xxxxxxxxxxx ][ http://lomo.kyberia.net ][
> >>>>>>> icq:35732873
> >>>>>>> ]
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>       
> >>>>>> -- 
> >>>>>> Aurel
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>     
> >>>>>   
> > 
> 

-- 

[ Julius Loman ][ lomo@xxxxxxxxxxx ][ http://lomo.kyberia.net ][ icq:35732873 ]

Other related posts: