Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved L2/Switching/VLANs
    62 Posts 6 Posters 7.1k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • bingo600B
      bingo600 @KDB9000
      last edited by

      @kdb9000
      Don't waste time on "instructions" 😊

      We WANNA see the iperf3 results

      If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a šŸ‘ - "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

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • K
        KDB9000 @johnpoz
        last edited by

        @johnpoz @bingo600

        System A > Synology (Same Network)

        >iperf3.exe -c 192.168.10.246
        Connecting to host 192.168.10.246, port 5201
        [  4] local 192.168.10.60 port 58904 connected to 192.168.10.246 port 5201
        [ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth
        [  4]   0.00-1.00   sec  74.8 MBytes   627 Mbits/sec
        [  4]   1.00-2.00   sec  74.8 MBytes   627 Mbits/sec
        [  4]   2.00-3.00   sec  77.8 MBytes   652 Mbits/sec
        [  4]   3.00-4.00   sec  78.1 MBytes   655 Mbits/sec
        [  4]   4.00-5.00   sec  63.5 MBytes   533 Mbits/sec
        [  4]   5.00-6.00   sec  73.6 MBytes   618 Mbits/sec
        [  4]   6.00-7.00   sec  74.2 MBytes   623 Mbits/sec
        [  4]   7.00-8.00   sec  76.2 MBytes   640 Mbits/sec
        [  4]   8.00-9.00   sec  74.4 MBytes   623 Mbits/sec
        [  4]   9.00-10.00  sec  75.9 MBytes   637 Mbits/sec
        - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
        [ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth
        [  4]   0.00-10.00  sec   743 MBytes   623 Mbits/sec                  sender
        [  4]   0.00-10.00  sec   743 MBytes   623 Mbits/sec                  receiver
        
        iperf Done.
        

        System B > Synology (passing through pfSense)

        >iperf3.exe -c 192.168.10.246
        Connecting to host 192.168.10.246, port 5201
        [  4] local 192.168.13.235 port 49405 connected to 192.168.10.246 port 5201
        [ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth
        [  4]   0.00-1.00   sec  78.0 MBytes   654 Mbits/sec
        [  4]   1.00-2.00   sec  78.2 MBytes   656 Mbits/sec
        [  4]   2.00-3.00   sec  78.0 MBytes   655 Mbits/sec
        [  4]   3.00-4.00   sec  78.1 MBytes   655 Mbits/sec
        [  4]   4.00-5.00   sec  78.1 MBytes   655 Mbits/sec
        [  4]   5.00-6.00   sec  77.8 MBytes   652 Mbits/sec
        [  4]   6.00-7.00   sec  77.9 MBytes   654 Mbits/sec
        [  4]   7.00-8.00   sec  78.1 MBytes   655 Mbits/sec
        [  4]   8.00-9.00   sec  78.2 MBytes   656 Mbits/sec
        [  4]   9.00-10.00  sec  78.2 MBytes   656 Mbits/sec
        - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
        [ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth
        [  4]   0.00-10.00  sec   781 MBytes   655 Mbits/sec                  sender
        [  4]   0.00-10.00  sec   781 MBytes   655 Mbits/sec                  receiver
        
        iperf Done.
        

        Drivers on all of the systems are up to date and the correct drives. The Synology is on the latest (and I do mean latest, I had to manually upload it from Synology) version of software. While the iperf seems to indicate there isn't a network issue, it doesn't explain why I have such a difference in speed in Layer 3 to Layer 2 (more then just SMB).
        Before I moved the Synology to the same network as System A I would get the following (I don't have actual numbers, so it is from memory at this point) when running a backup:

        System A (Main VLAN) > pfSense > Synology (Server VLAN) with speeds in the KB range and failure to complete
        System A (Main VLAN) > Synology (Main VLAN) with speeds in the MB range and completed without an issue

        When this test was done, I had two VLANs setup on the Synology (one on the Server VLAN and one on the Main VLAN). The backup is setup in the job to go to the Server VLAN IP. I told it to do a standalone backup (which is a full) to the Main VLAN IP of the Synology and got better results without failure of the backup. I also had issues uploading things to the Synology using OwnCloud when it was on the Server VLAN IP (no issues when it was on the Main VLAN IP, and this isn't SMB at this point). And those files were KB in size when it gave me issues. After the move to the Main VLAN, it didn't have an issue with those same files.

        bingo600B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • bingo600B
          bingo600 @KDB9000
          last edited by bingo600

          @kdb9000

          Funny that you have better performance on B->S via Vlan , than A->S via L2.
          Is your A machine weaker ?

          Edit: You don't have Jumboframes enabled in one end do you ?

          /Bingo

          If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a šŸ‘ - "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

          K 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • K
            KDB9000 @bingo600
            last edited by KDB9000

            @bingo600 said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:

            @kdb9000

            Funny that you have better performance on B->S via Vlan , than A->S via L2.
            Is your A machine weaker ?

            /Bingo

            System A is my main computer, which has a lot of stuff open and running on it (lots of chrome tabs, email, couple instances of Discord, SSH sessions, Skype, etc...). System B is my Gaming rig which has a couple chrome tabs and Discord running for the most part.

            bingo600B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • bingo600B
              bingo600 @KDB9000
              last edited by

              @kdb9000

              Just for completeness , try to run iperf the other way.

              NAS as client , to A/B as server

              If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a šŸ‘ - "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

              K 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • K
                KDB9000 @bingo600
                last edited by

                @bingo600 said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:

                @kdb9000

                Just for completeness , try to run iperf the other way.

                NAS as client , to A/B as server

                Synology > System A

                $ iperf3 -c 192.168.10.60
                Connecting to host 192.168.10.60, port 5201
                [  5] local 192.168.10.246 port 33627 connected to 192.168.10.60 port 5201
                [ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr  Cwnd
                [  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  38.0 MBytes   318 Mbits/sec    0   94.1 KBytes
                [  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  40.9 MBytes   343 Mbits/sec    0   94.1 KBytes
                [  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  39.0 MBytes   327 Mbits/sec    0   94.1 KBytes
                [  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  39.9 MBytes   335 Mbits/sec    0   94.1 KBytes
                [  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  37.7 MBytes   316 Mbits/sec    0   94.1 KBytes
                [  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  38.5 MBytes   323 Mbits/sec    0   94.1 KBytes
                [  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  35.7 MBytes   300 Mbits/sec    0   94.1 KBytes
                [  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  38.8 MBytes   326 Mbits/sec    0   94.1 KBytes
                [  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  41.5 MBytes   348 Mbits/sec    0   94.1 KBytes
                [  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  41.5 MBytes   348 Mbits/sec    0   94.1 KBytes
                - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                [ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
                [  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   392 MBytes   329 Mbits/sec    0             sender
                [  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   391 MBytes   328 Mbits/sec                  receiver
                
                iperf Done.
                

                Synology > System B

                $ iperf3 -c 192.168.13.235
                Connecting to host 192.168.13.235, port 5201
                [  5] local 192.168.10.246 port 52908 connected to 192.168.13.235 port 5201
                [ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr  Cwnd
                [  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  81.8 MBytes   686 Mbits/sec    0    271 KBytes
                [  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  82.1 MBytes   689 Mbits/sec    0    271 KBytes
                [  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  82.2 MBytes   690 Mbits/sec    0    271 KBytes
                [  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  82.4 MBytes   691 Mbits/sec    0    271 KBytes
                [  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  82.5 MBytes   692 Mbits/sec    0    271 KBytes
                [  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  82.2 MBytes   690 Mbits/sec    0    271 KBytes
                [  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  82.4 MBytes   691 Mbits/sec    0    271 KBytes
                [  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  82.5 MBytes   692 Mbits/sec    0    271 KBytes
                [  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  82.5 MBytes   692 Mbits/sec    0    271 KBytes
                [  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  82.4 MBytes   691 Mbits/sec    0    271 KBytes
                - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                [ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
                [  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   823 MBytes   690 Mbits/sec    0             sender
                [  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   823 MBytes   690 Mbits/sec                  receiver
                
                iperf Done.
                

                I did also get this once on the Synology going to System B:

                $ iperf3 -c 192.168.13.235
                iperf3: error - unable to receive control message: Connection reset by peer
                
                bingo600B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • bingo600B
                  bingo600 @KDB9000
                  last edited by

                  @kdb9000

                  Again the L2 xfer is slower , this time by a huge margin.
                  But still performing much better than your reported APP throughput.

                  You don't run Teamed network cards , w. shared mac ?

                  ISTR something like this a looong time ago on Cisco switches, when two HP servers was "teamed" and used the same MAC addr.

                  The Cisco went crazy as it saw the same mac on two ports , and was flushing the TCAM as crazy.

                  If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a šŸ‘ - "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

                  K 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • bingo600B
                    bingo600
                    last edited by

                    Well time to get some ZZzzzz - EU TZ
                    Good debug session

                    But a bit strange you're not even close to 930Mb/s , even on L2.
                    What netcards are in the NAS ?

                    Take care

                    /Bingo

                    If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a šŸ‘ - "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

                    K 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • K
                      KDB9000 @bingo600
                      last edited by

                      @bingo600 said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:

                      @kdb9000

                      Again the L2 xfer is slower , this time by a huge margin.
                      But still performing much better than your reported APP throughput.

                      You don't run Teamed network cards , w. shared mac ?

                      ISTR something like this a looong time ago on Cisco switches, when two HP servers was "teamed" and used the same MAC addr.

                      The Cisco went crazy as it saw the same mac on two ports , and was flushing the TCAM as crazy.

                      The Synology has all 4 NICs bonded with LACP. The switch that the 4 connects are hooked up to are setup as an Aggregate on the switch side (which also uses LACP). I can see that happening if they did Teamed on the HP only without setting up the switch side (I have a coupler servers at work that use Teamed connections and they go into Port Channel groups on the switch).

                      I have experience with LACP, and if it isn't configured correctly it won't work at all (ran into issues with Port Channels and the Active/Passive setup).

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • K
                        KDB9000 @bingo600
                        last edited by

                        @bingo600 said in Very Poor Performance on VLAN Routing:

                        Well time to get some ZZzzzz - EU TZ
                        Good debug session

                        But a bit strange you're not even close to 930Mb/s , even on L2.
                        What netcards are in the NAS ?

                        Take care

                        /Bingo

                        What ever the built in ones are. The system doesn't really say.

                        PippinP 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • PippinP
                          Pippin @KDB9000
                          last edited by

                          The 5 different Synology models I opened up all had Etron Tech nic's.

                          I gloomily came to the ironic conclusion that if you take a highly intelligent person and give them the best possible, elite education, then you will most likely wind up with an academic who is completely impervious to reality.
                          Halton Arp

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • First post
                            Last post
                          Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.