Link Aggregation benefits over wifi?

[Kashif Tasneem]

Hi guys. Suppose you have setup link aggregation between your NAS and the router using 2 ports. Each ethernet port is 1Gbps. Now you connect 2 wired clients to the router. Both of the clients will theoretically have 1Gbps transfer speed to the NAS if Link Aggregation is setup correctly? Correct? If not, transfer speed will be divided from 1 Gbps? Correct?

Does this link aggregation mechanism work if you connect 2 clients wirelessly through the router?

 

[coxhaus]

Yes and no. Your wired scenario is correct. With 1 wireless you can't achieve 1 gig yet. You can get close with 160mhz wide channels. Anyway you will need multiple wireless APs as wireless is limited to 1 client at a time talking and not duplexed like wire. Say you have 4 wireless AC APs the link aggregation for the NAS will help if all four 5 GHz wireless AC clients are using NAS at the same time. 2.4 GHz does not have high enough bandwidth unless you use probably go over 10 wireless APs. This is all based on having hardware that can support the bandwidth.

 

[L&LD]

Depending on the file sizes being transferred, it may not matter if you have a single Ethernet port connected to the NAS or if you have two connected.

The only time it will help is if the NAS storage is fast enough to give more than 1Gbps speeds, concurrently, for the file sizes requested by any number of clients connected.

So, what is the expected use here? Are we transferring GB's of movies or are we transferring GB's of Excel/Word files?

And over WiFi, the many GB's small file use performance will be greatly reduced because of the overhead WiFi entails on each 'transaction' (send or receive).

 

[Kashif Tasneem]

Guys, can you have a look at this: https://www.snbforums.com/threads/l...s-ax-11000-and-qnap-ts-451.64687/#post-593357

 

[L&LD]

That link doesn't give any additional info of your use except to say you're using 2 LAN Ports on the router with two separate client devices and the throughput to each is halved when used concurrently (same as what I inferred from your first post on this thread).

Why are you jumping to other threads and making this conversation confusing? Ask people to reply to this thread instead.

What files/file sizes are you transferring? Both ways (read and write to the NAS)? What is the actual use case here? That may hint at a better solution too?

Why do people not answer simple questions to get better help?

 

[Kashif Tasneem]

That link doesn't give any additional info of your use except to say you're using 2 LAN Ports on the router with two separate client devices and the throughput to each is halved when used concurrently (same as what I inferred from your first post on this thread).

Why are you jumping to other threads and making this conversation confusing? Ask people to reply to this thread instead.

What files/file sizes are you transferring? Both ways (read and write to the NAS)? What is the actual use case here? That may hint at a better solution too?

Why do people not answer simple questions to get better help?

Thanks for your reply. In this thread I discussed the concept. In the new thread, I implemented it with specific hardware.

I am testing by writing two 4 GB files from 2 wired clients onto the NAS at the same time.

 

[L&LD]

Writing consecutively to the NAS with two clients and two different files is showing the limitations of the NAS, not the network connection, IMO.