[clug] Storage and networking for Storage as used for supporting [Enterprise] virtualized environments

Sun Aug 18 11:56:57 UTC 2019

George,

I think you are mixing bits per second and byes per second in that list.
 E.g the Ethernet numbers would be Gb/s and the SATA numbers would be
MB/s.

Brett

On Sun, 18 Aug. 2019, 5:57 pm George at Clug via linux, <
linux at lists.samba.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I am looking for comments on my  below research on  "real world, a opposed
> to theoretical"  data speeds for various storage and network technologies;
>
> Below are the figures from my research (created for mono spaced font).
> Device                Realistic data throughput
> ADSL                 100KB/s, 200KB/s,400K/s, 1MB/s
> 7200 RPM HD        30-80MB/s
> 7200 RPM SATA        100MB/s
> 10K  RPM     100-130MB/s
> 15K  RPM         150-190MB/s
> Ethernet  100BASE-T   10MB/s
> Ethernet 1000BASE-T  116MB/s
> Ethernet 1000BASE-T (Jumbo Frames) 123MB/s
> SATA II             300MB/s
> SSDs                530/500MB/s
> SATA III            600MB/s
> RAID 6 x6 HD        600MB/s (4x read speed, no write speed gain)
> Ethernet 10GBASE-T 1.25GB/s
> RAID 6 x24 HD       2.2GB/s (22x read speed, no write speed gain)
> NVMe  (M.2)             3.4GB/s (3500MB/s )
> iSCSI                1GB/s, 10GB/s, and 40GB/s
> Fibre Channel        1GB/s, 2GB/s, 4GB/s, 8GB/s, 10GB/s, 16GB/s, 32GB/s
> and 128GB/s
>
> Not having much practical experience in Enterprise storage I am curious
> about any comments people can or would like to make.
>
> Regards,
>
> George.
>
>
>
>
> <B>Sources</B>
>
>
> https://forum.huawei.com/enterprise/en/some-differences-between-scsi-iscsi-fcp-fcoe-fcip-nfs-cifs-das-nas-san/thread/229549-891
> Some differences between SCSI, ISCSI, FCP, FCoE, FCIP, NFS, CIFS, DAS,
> NAS, SAN.
> Created: Sep 30, 2014 15:25:49Latest reply: Aug 6, 2019 20:20:21
>
> http://www.raid-calculator.com/default.aspx
>
> https://lenovopress.com/sg247986.pdf
>
>
> https://forum.huawei.com/enterprise/en/some-differences-between-scsi-iscsi-fcp-fcoe-fcip-nfs-cifs-das-nas-san/thread/229549-891
> Network-attached
> <https://forum.huawei.com/enterprise/en/some-differences-between-scsi-iscsi-fcp-fcoe-fcip-nfs-cifs-das-nas-san/thread/229549-891Network-attached>
> storage (NAS), in contrast to, uses file-based protocols such as NFS or
> SMB/CIFS where it is clear that the storage is remote, and computers
> request a portion of an abstract file rather than a disk block. The key
> difference between direct-attached storage (DAS) and NAS is that DAS is
> simply an extension to an existing server and is not necessarily networked.
> NAS is designed as an easy and self-contained solution for sharing files
> over the network.
> Network File System (NFS) is a distributed file system protocol originally
> developed by Sun Microsystems in 1984, allowing a user on a client computer
> to access files over a network in a manner similar to how local storage is
> accessed. On the contrary, CIFS is its Windows-based counterpart used in
> file sharing.
>
>
> https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/computer-science/storage-virtualization
>
> https://esj.com/articles/2014/05/16/fibre-channel-or-iscsi.aspx
> Fibre Channel infrastructure operates at throughput speeds of 1, 2, 4, 8,
> 10 and 16GB per second (GB/s). Over the years, speeds have continued to
> increase as storage performance demands have accelerated. Even faster
> speeds of 32GB/s and 128GB/s are expected to hit the market in the next
> couple of years.
> iSCSI uses standard Ethernet switches and cabling and operates at speeds
> of 1GB/s, 10GB/s, and 40GB/s.
>
>
> https://www.enterprisestorageforum.com/storage-hardware/ssd-vs-hdd-speed.html
>
>
> https://www.velocitymicro.com/blog/nvme-vs-m-2-vs-sata-whats-the-difference/
>
>
> https://www.convert-me.com/en/convert/data_transfer_rate/dEtherthous.html?u=dEtherthous&v=1
>
>
> https://www.cablefree.net/wireless-technology/maximum-throughput-gigabit-ethernet/
> Theoretical throughput of Gigabit Ethernet with jumbo frames, and using
> TCP:
> 997Mbps – .886 – 1.33 – 1.55 – .443 – 2.21 – 2.21 – 1.33 = 987Mbps or
> 123MB/s.
> The approximate throughput for Gigabit Ethernet without jumbo frames and
> using TCP is around 928Mbps or 116MB/s.
>
> http://rickardnobel.se/actual-throughput-on-gigabit-ethernet/
> Conclusion: Default Gigabit Ethernet has an impressive number of frames
> (about 81000 per second) possible and a high throughput for actual data
> (about 118 MB/s). By increasing the MTU to 9000 we could deliver even more
> data on the same bandwidth, up to 123 MB/s, thanks to the decreased amount
> of overhead due to a lower number of frames. Jumbo Frames could use the
> whole of 99% of Gigabit Ethernet bandwidth to carry our data.
>
>
> https://www.velocitymicro.com/blog/nvme-vs-m-2-vs-sata-whats-the-difference/
> Modern motherboards use SATA III which maxes out at a throughput of
> 600MB/s (or 300MB/s for SATA II, in which case, it’s time to upgrade). Via
> that connection, most SSDs will provide Read/Write speeds in the
> neighborhood of 530/500 MB/s. For comparison, a 7200 RPM SATA drive manages
> around 100MB/s depending on age, condition, and level of fragmentation.
> NVMe drives, on the other hand, provide write speeds as high as 3500MB/s.
> That’s 7x over SATA SSDs and as much as 35x over spinning HDDs!
>
> https://photographylife.com/nvme-vs-ssd-vs-hdd-performance
> In just read performance alone, my M.2 drive turned out to be a whopping
> 25x times faster than my enterprise-grade WD 2 TB 7200 RPM drive. That is
> just mind boggling, considering that SSD is only around 5x times faster in
> comparison. In write speed, I was able to witness up to 15x more
> performance, which is also a very impressive number. And that’s just for
> one type of sequential read/write load – if you look at the above numbers,
> other performance metrics indicate even larger, more noticeable gains.
>
> https://www.zdnet.com/article/why-raid-6-stops-working-in-2019/
> 7200 RPM full drive writes average about 115 MB/sec
>
>
> https://www.microsemi.com/product-directory/raid-controllers/4047-raid-levels#16
>
>
> https://www.atto.com/software/files/techpdfs/TechnicalSpecifications_FastFrameNIC.pdf
>
> https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/gigabit-ethernet
> Given a further 1% of overhead for TCP, this leaves a total of 118.75 MB/s
> for data transmission.
>
> Below are the figures from my research (created for tabs).
> Device                  Realistic data throughput
> ADSL                    100KB/s, 200KB/s,400K/s, 1MB/s
> 7200 RPM HD             30-80MB/s
> 7200 RPM SATA           100MB/s
> 10K  RPM                100-130MB/s
> 15K  RPM                150-190MB/s
> Ethernet 100BASE-T      10MB/s
> Ethernet 1000BASE-T     116MB/s
> Ethernet 1000BASE-T (Jumbo Frames)      123MB/s
> SATA II                 300MB/s
> SSD                     530/500MB/s
> SATA III                600MB/s
> RAID 6 x6 HD            600MB/s (4x read speed, no write speed gain)
> Ethernet 10GBASE-T      1.25GB/s
> RAID 6 x24 HD           2.2GB/s (22x read speed, no write speed gain)
> NVMe  (M.2)             3.4GB/s (3500MB/s )
> iSCSI                   1GB/s, 10GB/s, and 40GB/s
> Fibre Channel           1GB/s, 2GB/s, 4GB/s, 8GB/s, 10GB/s, 16GB/s, 32GB/s
> and 128GB/s
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> linux mailing list
> linux at lists.samba.org
> https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/linux
>