40-50mb/s cap with smb

[Dragon07062]

So, this is my first post on this Community and I hope to get help with my smb share. I'm posting this because I can't really find a solution to my problem. That said, I worked with Freenas a couple of months now but this gives me a headache.

at first my specs:

• Xeon E5 2620 v2 (...before the switch and a Xeon E5 2658 after the switch)
• 5* 8Gb ECC Registered RAM with 1333Mhz (yeah not 6, because one module is broken)
• Supermicro x9sri-f Mainboard
• 4x 2tb HDDs in RAIDZ1 (without the cache device)
• 80gb hdd as bootdrive
• LSI SAS 9210-8i HBA

At first I had just an smb share from the whole pool and created the folder on Windows. It's quite easy, but I don't think it's intended to do that if you want a good overview over freenas and want to add nfs shares or add a zvol because its going to be all in the same folder and easily saturated the 1GBit connection. So, I played some data tetris and made nested datasets in freenas to have a better overview and optimize the folder to the specific datatypes that are going to be stored there (like big record sizes for movies or iso files). Now, when I'm uploading something to it It's only getting up to 40-50Mb/s and it doesn't matter in which folder I'm uploading to. Surprisingly I still can download with 112MB/s like ISO files or so. I played around with the compression levels, record sizes, switched to a bigger cpu (I didn't buy it because of that, so don't mind), added RAM, added a 240gb SSD as caching devices but nothing helped.

This is my dataset structure:

I would appreciate your advices, because I really don't know what to do and if you need more informations I'll try to provide them as soon as possible.

 

[Dragon07062]

Ah and I forgot to add that I'm using Freenas 11.3 U1 ( I used 11.2 U5 one day before because I tried to reinstall everything and simultaneously wanted to upgrade). I also had the problem with the older version of Freenas too.

 

[SweetAndLow]

Your client is slow and it's what is bottlenecking you.

 

[Dragon07062]

Your client is slow and it's what is bottlenecking you.

My Client has a Ryzen 7 1700x, 20gb ram and a 240gb m.2 pciex2 ssd which I'm uploading from so I don't think my client is slow

 

[Dragon07062]

My Client has a Ryzen 7 1700x, 20gb ram and a 240gb m.2 pciex2 ssd which I'm uploading from so I don't think my client is slow

and I also tried copying from an other client, but has the same results

 

[jgreco]

My Client has a Ryzen 7 1700x, 20gb ram and a 240gb m.2 pciex2 ssd which I'm uploading from so I don't think my client is slow

Okay, so, prove it. Show us iperf statistics. Your failure to supply full system details about either side of this leaves this open to speculation, and the suggestion could be correct. High speed Ryzen or not, lots of mainboards are riddled with things like Realtek ethernets that perform poorly, so it's possible the suggestion is correct.

It could also be that you've hooked things up through a 100Mbps connection such as the switch built into your "router".

It could be that you've used SMR HDD's, which also tend to offer this sort of level of tragic performance.

Or one of any other common issues.

See, without providing a much better level of detail, it is easy to jump to a variety of conclusions about where your problem is. The only person here who can see your system and describe it for the forum is you.

 

[Dragon07062]

The client has a Asrock B450 Pro4 Mainboard with Realtek ethernet, but that doesn't explains why I can download with 112Mb/s off to it, but are only able to do 40-50Mb/s upload and it worked better before I did the nested datasets.

Here is the result of the iperf test:

My switch and my router both have gigabit and the ports the freenas server is connected to, are specificly set to gigabit.
I didn't change the hdds at all and they performed good before, so that can't be possible. (the hdds are HP 2TB 6Gb 7.2K SATA 3.5" product number: 657753-003)

 

[Dragon07062]

EDIT: Okay, I found the "problem". The hdds are really that slow. The Datasets had sync enabled so they'll show the real performance so I guess I just had it disabled before and that's why it seemed so fast when I copied something on there.

Still thank you for your solution tipps!