On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 11:05 PM, Chris Hellyar <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Volker... > > The enclosure is the 5 bay '9558U3' from PBtech. > > NUC end USB is: (lspci) > > 00:14.0 USB controller: Intel Corporation 8 Series USB xHCI HC (rev 04) > 00:1d.0 USB controller: Intel Corporation 8 Series USB EHCI #1 (rev 04) > > At the enclosure end: (lsusb) > > Bus 002 Device 002: ID 152d:0539 JMicron Technology Corp. / JMicron USA > Technology Corp. JMS539 SuperSpeed SATA II 3.0G Bridge > > I had a conversation with a friend who was doing a similar thing with > good results but I put it on the back burner as primary storage on USB > just sounds wrong! > > Then I had a customer job that needed 10TB+ of slack space for so I went > shopping on the basis that I could bill some of it out and/or Trademe > the lot if it didn't pan out. (I already had the NUC.) > > I originally used 5x 3TB Seagate Baracuda drives and I got OK > performance on read but it saw-toothed down as low as 10MB/s write on > sustained transfers so I flicked them and put in 5x4TB WD red's. (The > friend who suggested this used 4TB WD reds as well) > > Disk read performance to one of the LVM volumes with the code path > LVM->mdadm->USB : > > root@nuc:~# hdparm -Tt /dev/orico/files > /dev/orico/files: > Timing cached reads: 13002 MB in 2.00 seconds = 6505.64 MB/sec > Timing buffered disk reads: 470 MB in 3.00 seconds = 156.55 MB/sec > root@nuc:~# > > More than enough to make one client on a 1GB/s network happy. > > Small file write performance is as you'd expect: > > root@nuc:/data/files# dd if=/dev/zero of=outputtest bs=8k count=10k > 10240+0 records in > 10240+0 records out > 83886080 bytes (84 MB) copied, 0.0681586 s, 1.2 GB/s > > ie: straight into ram. :-) > > Larger files pretty respectable given the code path and software raid > over USB: > > root@nuc:/data/files# dd if=/dev/zero of=outputtest bs=8k count=100k > 102400+0 records in > 102400+0 records out > 838860800 bytes (839 MB) copied, 15.4919 s, 54.1 MB/s > > Which equates to about 550Mb/s over the wire. Ish, rule of thumb, sorta. > > If it were multi-user with large files I'm picking it'd get IO bound but > as a big storage bucket with mini hypervisor bolted on the side it's neat. > > The only issue I've had is sometimes the USB / mdadm stack would not > come up in time for LVM on restart so I've a script in rc.local to kick > the LVM into life and restart the NFS server after a 10s delay which > solved that issue. > > If you need grunt in a NAS/hypervisor you're obviously better off with > direct attached storage and a xeon/i7 but it's a nice geeky option for > light processor loads ans saving a few $ on power every month. :-) > > > Cheers, Chris H. > Looks like a good option when my tower server runs out of space for my ever growing media collection. > > > sdb,c and d are the > > On 28/06/16 11:47, Volker Kuhlmann wrote: > > On Mon 27 Jun 2016 22:17:34 NZST +1200, Chris Hellyar wrote: > > > > Wow I'm impressed. Could you give some more info re model numbers and > > approx price, for the Orinoco tower too? > > > > What exactly is the USB3 hardware you are using (chipsets, where)? Only > > recently Linux-USB3 was very painful when it comes to throughput, esp > > sustained, with some driver locking up, timing out, and auto-resetting > > frequently. > > > > Ta, > > > > Volker > > > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.canterbury.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/linux-users >
_______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.canterbury.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
