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

How did you move the file?  Windows explorer - cut & paste?

If that's what you did, the file gets transferred from the first folder across the network through your PC, and then back across the network to the second folder - so - your network, which you haven't described, would play a significant part in determining the time taken.

Wireless too !!!

With wired you usually (assuming a network switch) get full duplex so you can transmit & receive simultaneously, but with wireless, it's half duplex - that's going to be painful.

I've never tried to do it from the telnet prompt - but in theory "cp" should do a better job.

zhix wrote:

Hi All, I just bought a DNS 323, Setup as RAID 1 and 2 500Gb Seagate Disks inside.

I have a question, today when I tried to move my completed downloaded from the BT folder to another folder inside the DNS 323, the transfer speed was EXTREMELY slow, just a 10 MB file could NOT be completed within 30 min.

This is transfering of data within a single HDD inside the DNS 323.

Has anyone seen this issue and have the solution? Thank you in advance.

I beg to differ from the rest of the opinions on slow transfer using windows explorer... I, being a linux ultra-noob, have always used windows explorer transfering files within the DNS 323... Yes, the data does get transfered back to my pc before being transferred back to the dns 323 but it is nowhere near the 30mins for a 10mb file.

Perhaps, there are underlying issues with your network causing this slow transfer as opposed to using windows explorer

For the record i've moved files roughly about 5gb in size from one folder to another on the 323 and it takes less than 30mins.

OK Mihar - now let's hear about your network topology the problem here is there is no way to do a direct comparison.

5GB back and forth on gigabit, full duplex can be done in as little as 5~6 minutes - assuming a single 5GB file.
5GB back and forth on 100 mbit, full duplex can be done in roughly double that so 10~12 minutes - again assuming a single 5 GB file.

5GB back and forth on 802.11g - now that is an entirely different story.

802.11g will max out at roughly 30 mbit/sec (and that is best case scenario) and since it can only transfer in one direction at a time, your throughput is going to be effectively cut by 50% to 15 mbit/sec or 1.5~2 MB/sec - so that 5GB file will take an estimated 56 minutes - again assuming a single 5 GB file.

Please notice how much emphasis I have placed on that 5 GB single file - it's crucial that you understand that 5 GB of data is not just 5 GB of data - the transfer speed takes a serious nose dive as the file count increases and the file size decreases - not just because of the house keeping issues on the disks, but there is a transmit/receive switching latency in the wireless as well.

Last point - but (as they say), by no means least - wireless networks rarely deliver maximum throughput due to myriad reasons - attenuation due to distance, interference, etc., etc., etc..

In my opinion - just doing the transfer over wireless is sufficient to bring the performance down to what is reported.

zhix wrote:

mihar wrote:

zhix wrote:

Hi All, I just bought a DNS 323, Setup as RAID 1 and 2 500Gb Seagate Disks inside.

I have a question, today when I tried to move my completed downloaded from the BT folder to another folder inside the DNS 323, the transfer speed was EXTREMELY slow, just a 10 MB file could NOT be completed within 30 min.

This is transfering of data within a single HDD inside the DNS 323.

Has anyone seen this issue and have the solution? Thank you in advance.

I beg to differ from the rest of the opinions on slow transfer using windows explorer... I, being a linux ultra-noob, have always used windows explorer transfering files within the DNS 323... Yes, the data does get transfered back to my pc before being transferred back to the dns 323 but it is nowhere near the 30mins for a 10mb file.

Perhaps, there are underlying issues with your network causing this slow transfer as opposed to using windows explorer

For the record i've moved files roughly about 5gb in size from one folder to another on the 323 and it takes less than 30mins.

Hi mihar,

any ideas where i can start to check what is wrong with my network?

To furthur illustrate ..

PC A <---WIRELESS G---> Router <-----10/100---->NAS (folder B to folder C)


I use windows explorer in PC A to move data from folder B to folder C

You say you're using wireless? That could be the main reason... Wireless signals are prone to interference as well as losing the transmission strength depending on how far away the transmitter and receiver are...

If your router has diag logs, see if you can access it... You might find transmission errors... Take note that wireless g has a theorethical limit of 54mbps... In the real world you're unlikely to achieve those speeds... More like 10mbps and below... But even at that speed, a 10MB file shouldn't take more than 30mins...

fordem wrote:

OK Mihar - now let's hear about your network topology :wink the problem here is there is no way to do a direct comparison.

5GB back and forth on gigabit, full duplex can be done in as little as 5~6 minutes - assuming a single 5GB file.
5GB back and forth on 100 mbit, full duplex can be done in roughly double that so 10~12 minutes - again assuming a single 5 GB file.

5GB back and forth on 802.11g - now that is an entirely different story.

802.11g will max out at roughly 30 mbit/sec (and that is best case scenario) and since it can only transfer in one direction at a time, your throughput is going to be effectively cut by 50% to 15 mbit/sec or 1.5~2 MB/sec - so that 5GB file will take an estimated 56 minutes - again assuming a single 5 GB file.

Please notice how much emphasis I have placed on that 5 GB single file - it's crucial that you understand that 5 GB of data is not just 5 GB of data - the transfer speed takes a serious nose dive as the file count increases and the file size decreases - not just because of the house keeping issues on the disks, but there is a transmit/receive switching latency in the wireless as well.

Last point - but (as they say), by no means least - wireless networks rarely deliver maximum throughput due to myriad reasons - attenuation due to distance, interference, etc., etc., etc..

In my opinion - just doing the transfer over wireless is sufficient to bring the performance down to what is reported.

I agree... And just for the record, i'm running everything on wired cept for my laptop which i using wireless G... And those 5gb files i usually mentioned are isos of my DVD collection which i keep digitized....

When i first posted, i failed to notice that zhix had mentioned that he was using wireless g in his 2nd post...so i assumed he was using wired and for a 10MB file to take 30mins to transfer over wired is pretty much impossible by my standards...

Now that we know he is using wireless, and i'm guesstimating that his real world speed is roughly 10mbps and below, a 10MB file should still take less than a minutes to transfer... 10mbps = 1.25 Mb/s

Your comparison is in depth and accurate to a certain extent but had zhix mentioned that the file he was trying to transfer was 1GB, i would more or less agree it would take more than 30mins but his first post mentioned that a 10Mb took more than 30mins which i think is simply not possible unless there was serious issues with his network...

bspvette86 wrote:

I have to agree with Fordem here.  Wireless is largely dependent on the environment and there is a good deal of overhead in the communications.  My location is rather clean for wireless.  I did some throughput testing a few months back on various network configurations using Ixa Qcheck (freeware version) and found the following averages:

Wireless G = 20 Mbps
Wireless N = 62 Mbps
100 BaseT Switched= 96 Mbps
1000BaseT Switched = over 800 Mbps.  Software was not accurate at these speeds.

I stand by my previous post that a unix "mv" command will be faster than any of the previously mentioned methods to "move" files on the same hard drive.  (especially in Fordems 5GB file example)

Cheers!
bspvette

Again, i agree with you that a local command issued directly to the NAS would be invariably quicker that using windows explorer...

But, for a 10MB file to take more than 30mins to transfer even over wireless g, does it not invoke your curiosity?



Let's just assume that windows explorer is the only way that zhix can transfer files around within the NAS... I'm just trying to help him find the root cause of his problem which is the slow transfer speed and not moving files from within the NAS....

K, i did a simple test on my laptop using wireless g,Windows Vista and Windows Explorer... My DNS is running on standard with 2*750gb seagates... I moved a 12Mb file from Vol 1 to Vol 2 and it took 15 seconds... I moved a 16Mb file from Vol 1 to Vol 2 and it took 20 - 25 seconds... I moved a 120Mb file and it took 3 - 4 minutes...  I moved a 1Gb file and it took slightly under 30 mins... (Note: Moved = cut & paste)

How is it then zhix took more that 30mins to transfer a 10mb file on his machine when it was done in 15 seconds for mine?

Just to be sure i read correctly, i went over his first post and sure enough, he mentioned that it took more than 30mins to transfer a 10Mb file....

This is simply not possible unless there are serious network issues....

Zhix,

I've noticed this problem too.  On 1.05 firmware and when I copy TO the 323 via Windows Explorer, it's fast.  When I retrieve FROM the 323 via Windows Explorer, it's excruciatingly slow.  A 323MB file sent is ~2 min send, ~30min receive. 

My Specs:  Windows Server 2003 R2 SP2 32-bit, Intel PRO-1000MT Gigabit NIC.  Also have a D-Link DWA-652 wireless-N card & a D-Link DIR-655 router & a D-Link DGS-2208 for my D-Link DNS-323.  LOL  I'm a D-Link kinda guy.

Let me also add to what I've noticed.  If I use Microsoft's FTP client (Start -> Run -> FTP), and connect to the 323 and initiate a file transfer, it is also excruciatingly slow to download (same file, same amount of time). 

However, if I use something like FileZilla to FTP it gets 3.69MB/sec (29.52Mbit/sec) via the DWA-652 Wireless-N adapter, faster with the Gigabit NIC (9K jumbo frame support there).  I believe there is an issue here and it looks like SAMBA might be involved but I don't have enough know-how to point my finger at it with facts instead of intuition.

Trav

Nono... I have one laptop with an Intel MT1000 NIC with jumbo frame support set to 9K (it supports up to 16K).  I also have the DWA-652 installed in it and am fully aware of what it's capable of.  Wireless NICs don't have jumbo frame support due to wireless standard design (2376 bytes/frame).   I know how the "slowest link" concept can affect transfer rate, but that's not a central part of this issue.  When I look at my DIR-655's Wireless Status, this laptop's card is connected at 300mbit & 100% signal quality.  The issue again is not the network.

As a litmus test, I copied 2.5 GB between two laptops; I used my DWA-652 300mbit card and in the other, a standard intel b/g card.  The data copied between two sessions of Internet Explorer.  It transferred at 78% of the G card's rate, back and forth.  I'm very satisfied with a 42Mbit/sec rate.  That's still very much faster than the 3Mbit rate I am getting with the 323.  To take antivirus out of the picture, my laptop was running the same AV (Symantec MPT 11.0.2) and the other was running McAfee v8.  I've also tested the transfer rate to the 323 without AV and there was no change.

Also, don't read between the lines.  My OS is Server 2003.  The target device is the DNS-323.  When I retrieve data from the 323 with Windows Explorer, it is sloooow.  When I send data to the 323 with Windows Explorer, it is fast.   That was the reason this post was created and it is the same issue I'm experiencing. 

I suspect an issue with SAMBA.  Consder the facts:  in light of FTP transfers being faster when using either card and FileZilla FTP.   The red flag for me is something ususual:  there is no reason for a 600MB file to be sent to the 323 in 2 1/2 minutes but receive the exact same file from the 323 in just over 6 minutes.  When a devices write time is faster than its read time, I wonder.

ttmcmurry

A laptop with an Intel MT1000 nic - now that's a rarity - I've never seen the MT1000 outside of a server, that's why I was wondering.

One question for you - how are you measuring the speed?  Because 42 mbps on wireless is outstanding, I've never heard of anyone getting higher than mid to high 30s.

For what it's worth - as mig as said - you just haven't found the reason yet, for most of us read/write speeds are fairly close