Hardware specs to achieve 600+mbps
-
Hello,
so I was looking to get some suggestions for a new pfsense build that I am looking to put together. Currently my network is very scattered and contains many components. My household consists of
3 desktop computers, a netbook, 3 laptops, 5 iphones, 2 android phones, tivo, 3 freenas machines, 2 music players, and 4 video streaming media share boxes.
All the above can be seen at any given time accessing the net, streaming video, transferring files etc etc. Currently this is all connected to a netgear router via a 100/1000 switch. As I am sure you can imagine the network is drit slow, especially file transfers from the nas to the desktops although streaming is not effected but when your moving files it is..
The above free nas boxes all together contain roughly 70-72TB of storage, the reason for the 600+mbps is that many times other members of my family will pull massive 1080p video files, achieves of files, dvd's etc at the same time so I felt this would be a good solid amount given my calculations of the max amount of data being received/sent at any given time..
My question however is JUST for the server end of things what is needed for obtain this kind of throughput. cpu? memory? networking card interface? (would a on-board 1GbitE give the bandwidth needed for the lan?) etc etc. I saw that the recommended cpu spec is 3ghz+ now what if I had a dual core 2.6ghz, is this not sufficient or even more so? Of course costs is a concern as I would like to do this as cheap as possible and have no problem building it, just looking for some insight on what others know of or feel would be needed.
Thanks.
-
What bandwidth have you actually got on your internet connection/WAN?
-
Assuming you only have one internal subnet/interface, speeds on your internal network are not going to be affected by your firewall/router as connections between, for example, your NAS and a client PC on the same interface travel NAS <–-> switch <----> client.
Your limiting factor may well be disk transfer speed, if you have several clients doing high-bandwidth accesses (streaming video) from the same NAS at the same time. Most hard drives (even the newest and fastest) won't see much above 130M, and usually run about 100M (that's from the platter to the buffer, the slowest part of the operation). That's going to be slower with multiple accesses as the heads move from file to file.
Unless you have several internal networks/interfaces connected to each other through the router/firewall, the pfSense hardware is not going to help. It MAY improve your internet access, depending on the available bandwidth, as Bern suggests. The speeds in the pfSense hardware guide are for data transiting the router/firewall; from internet (WAN) to your local network (LAN) and/or between multiple internal LANS.
-
Your concern is the switch and NOT the firewall/router on your internet connection.
You have to have server NIC's with tcp/ip offloading capabilities. Freenas sucks when pushing when pushing large files across the network due to badly written NIC drivers. Go the windows Home Server way instead or some Ubuntu build. They handle heavy load much better…
-
The issue is the filesystem on the Freenas….NFS sucks pushing big files. Use ISCSI because it is block level transfer...
-
My WAN is 50mbit/10mbit…..
Maybe I had this confused then, I realized the WAN connection did not need this sort of hardware requirements but I thought the LAN did... so even if I ran a cat 5 cable out of a 10/100 port from my current router, to a 1000mbit switch (that could handle even close to the throughput I want) and as long as the other machines (all connected to the switch) had 1000mbit compatible cards/cables then the router (or pfsense box) does not even play a role in this, as all the data is going through the switch?
If this is the case, what are good things to look for when determining which switch to select.
@Supermule: I am not to familiar with ISCSI so I will have to take a look into it. Thanks
-
Get a HP something switch….great package at great price and very stable.
And yes....the only thing your router does, is routing the traffic over the connected interfaces. If its only internal traffic, it doesnt do anything other than to handle out IP addresses :)
-
Good to know, well looks like I will be placing my funds towards a new switch and a new AP as my current one only supports G and all my wireless devices support pre-n or N..
-
Just some thoughts
LACP would be my first thought, but a network diagram
would could give a better indication on what is possible.
What is your freenas hardware specs and current configuration, do you use ZFS?
a hp switch
As you already know freenas
LACP and freenas -
Had not thought of LACP which could be very useful as I do have an open PCI-E slot on my main freenas box. I am not very concerned about the other 2 freenas boxes cause they are not used as much (they are my roommates) and only store a few TB's each which I am not even sure what they store. Mine however is a 2x Xeon X3370, 16GB 1333 RAM, 24 x 2TB wd green drives in a hw raid 5 and yes I am using zfs.
-
Things to look for in a gig switch, performance-wise, are jumbo frame support and non-blocking. You may also be interested in QoS function, which would require at least a smart switch, but only if you find congestion happening in the switch.
Energy efficiency is good, stability is a must. Make sure you get enough ports.
If you're going 8 ports or 24 then I recommend the Netgear prosafe line. I've had lots of issues with the GS116 though and wouldn't recommend it.
-
The issue is the filesystem on the Freenas….NFS sucks pushing big files. Use ISCSI because it is block level transfer...
This is a bit of a tangent, but doesn't ISCSI necessitate the use of a distributed filesystem if accessed from more than one host? I've used freenas as an iscsi target for a single host, and although we weren't pushing it hard, it worked fine.
As for NFS sucking, are you referring to freenas's implementation or NFS in general? I have an Ubuntu server serving NFS from a single WD Green drive on an Atom 330 and it will push/pull platter speed without breaking a sweat. Granted, I had to do some tweaking of mount parameters and mtu to get it there.
-
Well seeing as how I need at least 10 ports just for the desktop pc's, file servers, and some ports for my AP's to plug into I think I will look into the 16 port, currently I have a 8 port switch that maxed and many devices are forced to be on wireless that I would like to be wired….
Looking over some reviews/prices, it seems the NETGEAR GS116 would be a good fit also considering there is a nice $25 rebate on it right now. I will let you all know how it works out... Did some speed tests over my current setup with the best possible route I could think of through my current 10/100mbit switch and was pulling roughly 45-50mbits from one of my freenas boxes to my desktop pc, seemed pretty slow but then again another member of my household could have been moving stuff or streaming through the switch. Regardless I think that a upgraded switch would benefit all of us, which just makes me think why am I the one paying for it ??? :P lol
Thanks again
Things to look for in a gig switch, performance-wise, are jumbo frame support and non-blocking. You may also be interested in QoS function, which would require at least a smart switch, but only if you find congestion happening in the switch.
Energy efficiency is good, stability is a must. Make sure you get enough ports.
If you're going 8 ports or 24 then I recommend the Netgear prosafe line. I've had lots of issues with the GS116 though and wouldn't recommend it.
-
45-50mbits from one of my freenas boxes to my desktop pc, seemed pretty slow
Are you using samba? nfs? other? Might be worth googling optimisations for your protocol, or check the manual. I was able to more than double my throughput on sequential file transfers over nfs with some tweaks.
-
45-50mbits from one of my freenas boxes to my desktop pc, seemed pretty slow
Are you using samba? nfs? other? Might be worth googling optimisations for your protocol, or check the manual. I was able to more than double my throughput on sequential file transfers over nfs with some tweaks.
ufs
-
ufs is the local filesystem. What protocol are your using to share it over the network. Or how are your clients connecting to freenas? Are they Windows clients?
-
ufs is the local filesystem. What protocol are your using to share it over the network. Or how are your clients connecting to freenas? Are they Windows clients?
oh oh sorry, Most of the clients connect through samba or ftp
-
Personally, I'd stay away from netgear or d-link switches if you're concerned about heavy traffic. The nice things about HP switches is the (transferable) life time warranty. Makes it real easy to pick up a used one and not worry about the condition of it much. What I don't like about the HP switches are how much slower they are compared to Dell and Cisco switches. Just some thoughts.
-
Personally, I'd stay away from netgear or d-link switches if you're concerned about heavy traffic.
http://www.netgear.com/Products/Switches/DesktopSwitches/GS116.aspx?detail=Specifications
The GS116 also has a lifetime warranty. It's specced for 1,488,000 packets/sec and 32 Gbps (non-blocking), so I'm not sure what you are referring to. Have you seen something that would suggest a problem?
D-link, on the other hand, out of the dozens I've looked at, I've seen more faulty than good, at least on the consumer-grade stuff. I would not spend more than about $10 on any d-link product under the sun, and would certainly never trust it with any important task.
-
I'm using a lot of Netgear devices and never had one problem.
A lot of FS726T and lately more GS716T/GS724T.
They all have a life-time warranty.Could you show some background on why someone shouldn't use Netgear devices? (I don't mean consumer grade devices.)
