DSM-G600, DNS-3xx and NSA-220 Hack Forum

Unfortunately no one can be told what fun_plug is - you have to see it for yourself.

You are not logged in.

Announcement

#1 2009-11-27 18:31:24

meneldur
New member
Registered: 2009-11-27
Posts: 2

rsync vs. samba file transfer speed

Folks:

Just got the DNS-323 after seeing the reviews and noting the great stuff that has been done via the hacking community. Amazing little box for the price.

Anyhow, the box came with the 1.07 version of the firmware, and I installed the 0.5 version of the fun_plug. I have a home network with Linux machines on a D-Link gigabit switch. I figured I would naturally use rsync on my Linux boxes to make backups to the DNS-323, much as I'd been doing with a USB hard drive I've had for a while.

I was surprised to see that my overall transfer rate for moving my 90GB home directory to the NAS was only 1.8MB/s. (Yes, it certainly took a while!) I started looking for problems (wiring and so forth) and compared the figure against that for copying an 825MB disk image between my laptop and main workstation. Both computers are hardwired to the LAN, though the netbook has only a 100Mb connection. Here, I got a transfer rate of just over 11 MB/s.

Here's the curious thing...if I copy the file via a samba share to the DNS-323, I get 10.3 MB/s.

Anybody have a notion as to why using an rsync transfer would be soooo much slower than samba? I would have thought that, if anything, it should be faster.

Offline

 

#2 2009-11-28 03:27:20

meneldur
New member
Registered: 2009-11-27
Posts: 2

Re: rsync vs. samba file transfer speed

Ahh!

I did some further investigation into rsync. Looks like it's use does result in a performance hit. And THEN, I found something similar here in the forums dealing with rsync vs. ftp:

http://dns323.kood.org/forum/viewtopic.php?id=2940

Don't know how I missed it in my earlier forum searches. Anyhow, setting up rsyncd on the DNS-323 and doing away with encryption brings up the speed a fair amount. Not up to the simple copy to the samba share, but at least up to around 7MB/s. Now it's time to futz around some more and see if any further gains are (somehow) possible.

Offline

 

#3 2010-01-03 20:18:47

jasonr
New member
Registered: 2010-01-03
Posts: 1

Re: rsync vs. samba file transfer speed

I've run into the same issue.  I'd rather not abandon the use of the SSH login since it allows for more flexibility for destination naming vs the rsync over tcp with predefined module names.  I looked into speeding up ssh - without recompiling, you can't turn off encryption in ssh (which is the real culprit).  However, you can use a less heavyweight cipher than the default one - this makes quite a speed difference.

I ran a set of tests to characterize the cipher transfer performance for the same 70MB file from a PC to a DNS323. Here are my results:
Cipher    throughput MBps
arcfour256    5.7
arcfour128    5.3
arcfour    4.3
blowfish    3.8
blowfish-cbc    3.1
cast128-cbc    2.8
aes128-cbc    2.2
aes128-ctr    2.2
des    2.1
aes192-ctr    1.9
aes256-ctr    1.7
aes256-cbc    1.7
aes192-cbc    1.2
3des-cbc    1.1
3des    0.99

You can specify the cipher by adding a parameter to the rsync command: 
example:
rsync -azP -e "ssh -c arcfour256"

Hope this helps.

Jason

Offline

 

#4 2010-01-03 20:24:19

oxygen
Member
Registered: 2008-03-01
Posts: 320
Website

Re: rsync vs. samba file transfer speed

if you use rsync on a daily basis, just run the rsync daemon instead of rsync over ssh.

Last edited by oxygen (2010-01-03 20:24:30)

Offline

 

#5 2010-01-04 02:54:07

jamesc
New member
Registered: 2009-11-11
Posts: 2

Re: rsync vs. samba file transfer speed

If you're just transferring at home, ssh isn't necessary.  Trying the sync-ing feature of lftp and you should get up to 12MB/s.

Offline

 

Board footer

Powered by PunBB
© Copyright 2002–2010 PunBB