Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing
-
@kdb9000 which specific nas do you have - can lookup up which version of the software you need. I have ds918 which is the apollolake software..
-
@johnpoz said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
@kdb9000 which specific nas do you have - can lookup up which version of the software you need. I have ds918 which is the apollolake software..
DS1817+
-
@kdb9000 said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
Nothing in the network as changed since I posted the initial thread, and the SMB traffic between the VLANs is still very poor compared to what the iperf test shows (which I have seen some people the iperf test isn't a very good test).
I hate it when people are using SMB as ANY kind of network performance test.
SMB performance depends on the Server CPU load , and disk load at the exact moment.Then i end up having people blaming the network , for their lousy overcomitted Virtual server, with mechanical disks
/Bingo
-
@kdb9000 said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
although Main and Gaming at on the same interface. When I tried to move it, pfSense was having issues with the routing (it still said it was on the one interface when I had moved it to another interface) and was blocking the traffic (at least outbound from the VLAN, inbound to the VLAN worked fine).
So the above iperfs you showed , are using "On a stick" (same) interface.
As it's Main -> Gaming , and reverse ?/Bingo
-
@bingo600 said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
@kdb9000 said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
Nothing in the network as changed since I posted the initial thread, and the SMB traffic between the VLANs is still very poor compared to what the iperf test shows (which I have seen some people the iperf test isn't a very good test).
I hate it when people are using SMB as ANY kind of network performance test.
SMB performance depends on the Server CPU load , and disk load at the exact moment.Then i end up having people blaming the network , for their lousy overcomitted Virtual server, with mechanical disks
/Bingo
I monitored the Synology system, it was basically idle when I tried doing the backup and/or file transfers. OwnCloud doesn't use SMB (at least when uploading through the web page and I do not believe so with the Windows Client), and was also problematic. The Veeam backup does use SMB, and while monitoring the performance of the computer and the storage there wasn't anything that would cause the transfer to be slow. To also add to that, when I did the VLAN setup on the Synology (one VLAN in the same as the system backing up, the other required me to go to pfSense) it would preform at the 500 KB/s going across the VLAN compared to the MB/s I see when I went to it directly on Layer 2. These test were done one right after the other (not at the same time).
I will also point out that I do not have any Virtual Servers (unless you want to count what I am running in Docker as a Virtual Server) in play with this setup. If you want to blame Docker for the OwnCloud part, I had slow transfers, interrupted transfers, and issues when using it over Layer 3. I did not have any issues when I switch it to Layer 2.
-
@bingo600 said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
@kdb9000 said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
although Main and Gaming at on the same interface. When I tried to move it, pfSense was having issues with the routing (it still said it was on the one interface when I had moved it to another interface) and was blocking the traffic (at least outbound from the VLAN, inbound to the VLAN worked fine).
So the above iperfs you showed , are using "On a stick" (same) interface.
As it's Main -> Gaming , and reverse ?/Bingo
Yes, until I can get pfSense to correctly move the VLAN to another interface. I am Working from Home, so it isn't very easy to reset my Router/Firewall at this time.
-
My SMB "rant" was not meant for you, in particular.
It was gathered , from many job debug situations , where 95% of the SMB tests , were proven wrong by iperf. But it takes a lot of convincing to get a M$ Admin to accept that iperf is the way to go, when testing network performance. -
@bingo600 said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
My SMB "rant" was not meant for you, in particular.
It was gathered , from many job debug situations , where 95% of the SMB tests , were proven wrong by iperf. But it takes a lot of convincing to get a M$ Admin to accept that iperf is the way to go, when testing network performance.I wasn't sure, but I know some people might pick it up and run with it. And I know what you mean, we have to fight with out Database people about the Storage system (they keep blaming performance issues on Storage when we do not see any issues related to it). We did find issues with the Databases that we brought to their attention, and after that most of the issues stopped or it wasn't as bad as it was.
-
Did you see this one
https://www.reddit.com/r/synology/comments/f2s6nv/only_getting_1gbit_transfer_speeds_rather_than/Something about SMB signing
-
@bingo600 said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
Did you see this one
https://www.reddit.com/r/synology/comments/f2s6nv/only_getting_1gbit_transfer_speeds_rather_than/Something about SMB signing
SMB Signing is related to Domains (as far as I can tell and something that was mentioned in the Reddit you sent). One of the Synology troubleshooting guides mentioned SMB Signing as well, but it was only if the Synology was part of a Domain setup.
-
Re iperf install
https://www.synology.com/en-global/knowledgebase/DSM/tutorial/Compatibility_Peripherals/What_kind_of_CPU_does_my_NAS_have
DS1817+ Intel Atom C2538 Quad Core 4 Yes Avoton DDR3 2/8 GB
Do you see any Avoton arch - iperf packages
If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a š - "thumbs up"
pfSense+ 23.05.1 (ZFS)QOTOM-Q355G4 Quad Lan.
CPUĀ : Core i5 5250U, Ram : 8GB Kingston DDR3LV 1600
LANĀ : 4 x Intel 211, DiskĀ : 240G SAMSUNG MZ7L3240HCHQ SSD -
@bingo600 said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
DS1817+ Intel Atom C2538 Quad Core 4 Yes Avoton DDR3 2/8 GB
http://www.jadahl.com/iperf-arp-scan/DSM_6.2/iperf_avoton-6.2_3.7-1.spk
Install that spk, then ssh to your nas, then just run iperf3 -s
Then hit your nas IP from linux or windows client also running iperf.. I compile iperf3 for windows myself..
Here is that
iperf3.9_64.zipAn intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.7.2, 24.11 -
@bingo600 said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
Re iperf install
https://www.synology.com/en-global/knowledgebase/DSM/tutorial/Compatibility_Peripherals/What_kind_of_CPU_does_my_NAS_have
DS1817+ Intel Atom C2538 Quad Core 4 Yes Avoton DDR3 2/8 GB
Do you see any Avoton arch - iperf packages
@johnpoz said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
@bingo600 said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
DS1817+ Intel Atom C2538 Quad Core 4 Yes Avoton DDR3 2/8 GB
http://www.jadahl.com/iperf-arp-scan/DSM_6.2/iperf_avoton-6.2_3.7-1.spk
That one worked. Is there a specific way to turn on the server part (do I need to do it from the command line or is it just always running)?
-
see my post above yours ;) I edited it.
from the client you would run iperf3 -c ipaddressofnas
edit: To @bingo600 rant on smb tests.. I really agree there... While slow smb transfers of can be a symptom of network problems. It doesn't prove that there is a network issue..
If you do an iperf and its slow - then that can explain your slow smb. If your your iperf test shows the network is fine for speed, then your slow smb problem is something else..
The iperf you showed are not normal for a gig network... So something is clearly not right there..
But lets see test from device A to B on the same network - this should be 940ish maxed out if everything is perfect.. But as long as your in the 800's - could just be driver issue, etc.. Maybe you need to do some tweaking of the driver settings or something. But if you were seeing 800ish on your network... You should be seeing more than 80MBps -- should be 100 or so.. And you sure shouldn't be seeing wild fluctuations in the transfer
-
@johnpoz said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
see my post above yours ;) I edited it.
from the client you would run iperf3 -c ipaddressofnas
Not sure which post you are referring to. When I try and run the test to the Synology, I get connection refused (I have it installed and it says it is running).
-
And are you running firewall on your NAS?
-
@johnpoz said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
And are you running firewall on your NAS?
No, it is disabled.
-
@kdb9000 said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
@johnpoz said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
see my post above yours ;) I edited it.
from the client you would run iperf3 -c ipaddressofnas
Not sure which post you are referring to. When I try and run the test to the Synology, I get connection refused (I have it installed and it says it is running).
Now .. Your pfSense or your NAS isn't blocking the iperf packages ?
I usually "cheat" and run iperf as root ... Not that that would help if iptables is blocking./Bingo
-
Are you running it through pfsense? - port 5201 is the default port.. That will have to be allowed, but refused points to OS sending back icmp saying NO. Ie an OS firewall. If your trying to use a 2.x client on your test client the port is different.. You need to use iperf3 on both client and server - the nas version is 3.7, I uploaded windows 3.9 version which work fine together.
-
@johnpoz said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
Are you running it through pfsense? - port 5201 is the default port.. That will have to be allowed, but refused points to OS sending back icmp saying NO. Ie an OS firewall. If your trying to use a 2.x client on your test client the port is different.. You need to use iperf3 on both client and server - the nas version is 3.7, I uploaded windows 3.9 version which work fine together.
@bingo600 said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
@kdb9000 said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
@johnpoz said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:
see my post above yours ;) I edited it.
from the client you would run iperf3 -c ipaddressofnas
Not sure which post you are referring to. When I try and run the test to the Synology, I get connection refused (I have it installed and it says it is running).
Now .. Your pfSense or your NAS isn't blocking the iperf packages ?
I usually "cheat" and run iperf as root ... Not that that would help if iptables is blocking./Bingo
It is from the system on the same network (so not pfSense at this point). Running a "netstat -nato" on the Synology, I don't see it listening on port 5201. I am using 3.1.3 on Windows.
