Synology/NAS performance (Solved)

[theNEOone]

I've just set up a Synology DS216play for some of my media storage and file backup and I'm not too happy with the performance relative to having the HDDs in my tower connected directly via SATA.

First problem was the process of moving my data. It took 18 hours to transfer about 1TB. There were a few snags in the process, but the transfer rate averaged about 10-11 MB/s over my home network (gigabit).

Second issue emerged when trying to validate that all files were properly transferred over. When I right-click --> Properties on a folder within Windows Explorer, I normally get a file count and size relatively quickly. For some larger folders (10,000+ files, 50GB+), it takes a few seconds for an HDD connected via SATA. Doing this same check on the Synology drive (which is mapped as a network drive) takes several minutes.

I have the same exact drive in my tower and the NAS (4TB WD Red) and essentially an exact copy of the same data.

Is this slowness normal?


=|

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Yeah, pretty much normal.

You should be able to transfer data to/from a NAS faster than 11MB/sec, but without knowing what kind of and duration of "snags" you encountered during the transfer... yeah. Also without knowing what kind of network connection you have. (That would actually be pretty darned good for WiFi.)

Also, consider disabling drive sleep/spindown on the NAS. That will tend to cause unfortunate delays.

A NAS is about convenience and accessing files over a network, not speed.

 

[Yakk]

Hmm, how you're network performance otherwise? A DS216 should be able to sustain around 30-40mb/s in mixed files. If it is not doing other work.

 

[PliotronX]

I would verify switchports operating at gigabit because 10-11MB/sec smells like FE ((100/8)*.88).

 

[SeanFL]

That seems slow. I have a DS214 and get 50-70MB/s on transfers over a gigabit network. Consider simplifying the network and get the Synology right next to the computer with a gigabit switch. Same speed? Does Synology say that it's on a gigabit network? Cabling cat 5e+ or cat 6?

Sean

 

[Anubis]

it has a GigE port so it should be running much faster.

if your router/switch/cabling compatible with GigE? that speed is 100 base not 1000 base

i have a DS1515+ and it runs 80-100 MB/s over a single GigE connection

 

[BlueWeasel]

That certain seems like it's running at 100Mbps, not gigabit. When I had a Synology, I got 50 MB/s with slow green drives.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Copying files from my TS-212-something (RAID 1) to a TS-451 (RAID 5), over a wireless AC1200 adapter, I was getting 0 to 18MB/sec. That's the total throughput, reading AND writing. (Since I had to read one NAS, and write to the other, and wireless is half-duplex, that meant I was getting almost 40MB/sec to my wireless AP over my AC1200 bridge.)

 

[rchunter]

In my house most everything I can is wired into a 24 port hp procurve gigabit switch. With my Synology 1513+ I usually get between 80-110MB/sec transfer rates when copying files. A lot depends on the type of file it is. If it's a single large file or a ton of small files it's obviously slower.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

When an active user abandons their own thread without providing more information, that usually means they figured it out on their own, but whatever the source of the problem, they're too embarrassed to tell us what it is.

 

[Anubis]

he hasn't made a single post anywhere since this thread

not what I would call active

 

[KentState]

I bet your NAS was indexing the files during transfer. That can kill the volume performance on a Synology. On my 1511+, I can typically get ~110MB/sec which is 100% utilization of my 1Gbps port. To your second issue, I would use DSM itself for file operations like counts.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

he hasn't made a single post anywhere since this thread

not what I would call active

User info screen shows last active/login date.

Heeeeee's waaaatchiiiing uusssssss...

 

[theNEOone]

When an active user abandons their own thread without providing more information, that usually means they figured it out on their own, but whatever the source of the problem, they're too embarrassed to tell us what it is.

Just realized I never responded.... Bad etiquette, sorry!

The problem was, in fact, my wireless network. It was at 100mb/s, not gigabit.

I've since gone with a wired ethernet connection and things are working much more smoothly.

Thanks all for your help.


=|

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk