TS-509 with 4GB RAM

[Dennis Wood]

Definitely report back here if you have issues. Good to hear it's working ok for you. The RAM is pretty much a non-issue, other than perhaps optimizing SAMBA to take advantage. From what we're seeing on the two units testing though, the RAM update is performing exactly as predicted with files up to 4GB in size...and that's with zero code tweaks. If I had the time/patience to tweak SAMBA settings I would. We've got some extra parts floating around here so I smell an Ubuntu server coming soon....

Cheers,
Dennis.

 

[faaip05]

Seems to be working great, seems that the drive spin down a little bit quicker then normal, but I can live with it.

After testing I have been able to sustain file reads and writes at around 75MB/s between my Desktop and the NAS.

At first I was disappointed when it was said to forgo the jumbo frames, but now I am perfectly happy with the TS-509.

 

[Dennis Wood]

That sounds about right. With large file writes (over 10GB), the first 3GB or so will go at 100MB/s and then settle in about around 50MB/s. With reads, we're seeing from 75 to 85MB/s. The unit using the WD "Green" drives is at 75MB/s and the unit using Seagate Enterprise drives is at 85MB/s sustained reads. What we have not explored is whether the Netgear GS108T hosting unit 1 is any faster/slower than the 16 port 3COM 2916 switch unit 2 is on. The Netgear GS108T may be the least expensive LACL switch on the planet right now that fully supports 802.3ad link aggregation. For 8 ports, some very advanced features (web managed) and silent operation, this little switch is very affordable.

 

[MrFixit]

Netgear GS108T or HP ProCurve 1800-8G?

Dennis,

I know you have the 24G model but would you rate the HP 8 port unit over the Netgear switch that you have?

Prices are similar here in the UK: Netgear is ~£94 and the HP is ~106 (both inc. VAT) for Dabs.com.

 

[Dennis Wood]

If the HP 8G OS is the same as the 24G, then yes, I'd take it over the Netgear. HP's LACP implementation is the only one that actually makes sense to me. So far, the HP 1800-24G switch is the only one that works well with load balancing enabled on the TS509, whilst using dual NIC workstations (Marvel chipset). Previously the workstation dual NIC's had to be disabled and single ports used leaving only the TS509s trunked.

Having now looked at five 802.3ad switches, the HP Procurve would be my preference in terms of it's LAG performance, silence!! and ease of configuration via the web interfaces. It's also lickity split quick.

 

[MrFixit]

If the HP 8G OS is the same as the 24G, then yes, I'd take it over the Netgear. HP's LACP implementation is the only one that actually makes sense to me. So far, the HP 1800-24G switch is the only one that works well with load balancing enabled on the TS509, whilst using dual NIC workstations (Marvel chipset). Previously the workstation dual NIC's had to be disabled and single ports used leaving only the TS509s trunked.

Having now looked at five 802.3ad switches, the HP Procurve would be my preference in terms of it's LAG performance, silence!! and ease of configuration via the web interfaces. It's also lickity split quick.

Thanks for the info Dennis - it is nice to have first hand experience to go on.

As far as I can tell the 8 port version is identical to the 24 port (but with less ports) except for the mini-GBIC port features. But then I was not planning on using fibre.

From HP's datasheet:

"The HP ProCurve Switch 1800 Series consists of two Gigabit, fanless, Web-managed switches that are ideal for deployment in open offices that require silent operation. The HP ProCurve Switch 1800-24G is a 24-port 10/100/1000 switch with two dual-personality ports for RJ-45 10/100/1000 or mini-GBIC fiber Gigabit connectivity. The HP ProCurve Switch 1800-8G is a small form factor, 8-port 10/100/1000 switch. The ProCurve Switch 1800 Series enables increased network capabilities and control versus unmanaged switches, with support for fundamental networking protocols such as trunking and VLANs. Both switches are managed through an intuitive Web interface. The ProCurve Switch 1800 Series is ideal for businesses making the transition from unmanaged connectivity to managed networks without added cost or complexity."​

From this I guess the OS's would be very similar - they both use the HP ProCurve Manager via Web browser - the 8G just lacking anything to do with the GBIC ports.

From the spec the only real differience that I can see is that the installed memory is somewhat reduced:

8-G

• 1 MB flash, 64 KB SDRAM, 1 MB RAM/ROM capacity; packet buffer size 500KB

24-G

• 2 MB flash, 64 KB SDRAM, 2 MB RAM/ROM capacity; packet buffer size 144KB

I am assuming that this is only because there is no need with only one third of the number of ports, and obviously may impact the price - so it looks like I may be raiding the IT piggy bank

BTW - my workstations have one PCI-e Gbit interface and one PCI interface. While I know that the PCI one will be a little slower, I am hoping that the overall imapct of not having both as PCI-e is low.

 

[Dennis Wood]

Thanks for saying thanks Yep, the 8 port HP is the one you want then. With the number of switches we've tested over the last 4 months it's nice to be able to help others make informed choices. Being that it's almost impossible to get your hands on these units before buying, the only recourse is folks sharing opinions via the web. The one thing missing from the HP switches is comprehensive error logging. That said, HP's LACP status page is the only one like it amongst these inexpensive switches.

If you need to max out your NAS performance there are two things you need on your workstations:

1. RAID 0 (onboard is fine, but use 3 drives if possible)
2. PCIe gigabit. I'm betting your slower workstation has a PCIe (1x slot) free.

Not the end of the world if you keep the PCI gigE workstation but it will limit speed. If you're using just a single hard drive in it...then the PCI card isn't that much of a hit.

 

[MrFixit]

Dennis,

Thanks again for the switch recommendation.

I probably could have been clearer about my NICs. I have two Workstations each of which have one PCI-e GBit interface and one PCI GBit interface i.e. they both have two GBit interfaces (built into the motherboard) with one of these being PCI-E and the other one just PCI.

So what I am considering is combining these GBit interfaces on each workstation to get maximum performance by connecting them to the 8 port HP switch (together with the two GBit interfaces on the TS-509). That then leaves 1 port to connect to my router and 1 spare.

Is that how it works?

 

[Dennis Wood]

Linux has the ability to "team" disparate NICs but windows does not (although I'd guess there's a tool or two out there to do this). Our workstations have dual onboard NICs (Marvel Yukon) based and although ASUS does not claim that they can be teamed...installing the driver from Marvell does work just fine. In other words, the NIC manufacturer normally provides the teaming driver in the windows environment.

Now if the workstations are not serving up files, or accessing two NAS units at the same time, there's little benefit to teaming them anyway. A busy NAS will do much better with dual NIC's in load balancing configuration so that multiple workstations don't saturate one "pipe".

I'll have to look at port stats a bit closer on the Procurve switch to see exactly how it's arranging it's pairs being that it's the first switch handling LACP as I'd expect. A first look would suggest it's dynamically adjusting the trunking depending on what's on the network.

EDIT: A quick look at the HP switch stats show that something different is going on as opposed to the 3COM 2916 switch. During a large file transfer from an LACP (dual NIC) workstation to the dual NIC (LACP again) TS509, both ports are busy with TX and RX traffic on both ends. In other words, for the first time, I'm observing a dual NIC setup where both ports are being used to increase bandwidth to the workstation..and that's pretty cool. Previously, one port was pretty much idle in the same situation. So when it comes to LAG and LACP, not all switches that claim to adhere to the 802.3ad standard behave the same...and HP so far is 2 thumbs up.

This also means that based on these observations (more testing required) a dual NIC workstation should perform better than a single NIC workstation when accessed a load balancing NAS...providing you're using a switch that does LACP like the Procurve does.

 

[david.woodward]

One DIMM or two?

Thanks for the tip on upgrading to 4GB of RAM. I was trying to decide if the price was worth it because a lot of the files I access are 2-3 GB in size and the drop in performance after 1GB was not very attractive. The extra perfomance boost on large files after the memory upgrade made the decision easy. (They should really sell a "Pro+" version of this unit that comes with 4GB preinstalled)

So, anyway... my question is this. I noticed from the pics of the motherboard (on your review of the TS-509 Pro) that it looks like there is only room for one DIMM on the motherboard. Are the slots stacked on top of eachother or something? Does the unit really take two DIMMs?

Thanks again,
David

 

[Dennis Wood]

Yes, the SODIMMS insert at about 45 degrees then rotated downwards to engage the two plastic retaining clips on each side of the SODIMM. Right now there is one slot used with a 1GB SODIMM. You remove that and replace with 2 x 2GB SODIMMS which end pretty much laying on top of each other. This is a convention used in many laptops to save space.

Cheers,
Dennis.

 

[Don]

Yes it does take two dimms.

 

[lifeisfun]

One additional 1GB woul be also acceptable - Right ?

 

[Dennis Wood]

Absolutely.

 

[lifeisfun]

Perfect, leftover from laptop upgrade will be put to good use !

 

[andbir]

Cas 4/5

In keeping with our rather exhaustive exploration of NAS performance, we've updated our two TS509 units to 4GB of RAM. A 4GB kit (2 x 2GB SO-DIMM 667 DDR2) did the trick. The RAM is from Kingston, part number KVR667D2S5K2/4G with a cost of about $80 (CAD) for the kit (2 sticks). These are SO-DIMM sticks which are typically used in laptops.

These are CAS Level 5 (CL5) memory chips, did anyone try it with faster (i.e. CL4) chips?

Thanks,


andreas

 

[AndyJapan]

One additional 1GB woul be also acceptable - Right ?

These are CAS Level 5 (CL5) memory chips, did anyone try it with faster (i.e. CL4) chips?

I like the idea of 'lifeisfun' as an upgrade to 2GB might deliver a speed boost at a rather low cost. (Buying only 1x 1GB SODIMM vs. buying 2x 2GB SODIMMs)
The question is whether any 1GB SODIMM would be compatible.
Does anyone know the brand and specs of the 1GB SODIMM that is installed by QNAP? I assume that Dennis might know it as he upgraded his TS-509.
I am asking as I would try to pick a SODIMM with identical specs in order to avoid any compatibility problems.

 

[Don]

Does anyone know the brand and specs of the 1GB SODIMM that is installed by QNAP? I assume that Dennis might know it as he upgraded his TS-509.
I am asking as I would try to pick a SODIMM with identical specs in order to avoid any compatibility problems.

The specs are in the previous post.

 

[AndyJapan]

The specs are in the previous post.

Don, you are right that Dennis mentioned that Kingston 667MHz DDR2 Non-ECC CL5 SODIMMs worked, but Dennis removed the 1GB DIMM and installed the 2 Kingston SO-DIMMs that he purchased as kit - usually a troublefree & safe solution. However, I would like to install an additional 1GB SO-DIMM only.
I had trouble with incompatible RAM in the past and might therefore be a little bit overcautious when it comes to RAM upgrades.
I now decided to open the TS-509 and check out what RAM is installed before ordering an additional SO-DIMM. Best case scenario would be if I could just use the 1GB SO-DIMM from my previously upgraded EeePC 1000H.

 

[faaip05]

You are correct, they are stacked.

The 509 does in fact take two.