From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91C09158020 for ; Sun, 18 Dec 2022 18:56:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 14E44E0894; Sun, 18 Dec 2022 18:56:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-lj1-x231.google.com (mail-lj1-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::231]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC5BFE085A for ; Sun, 18 Dec 2022 18:56:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lj1-x231.google.com with SMTP id l8so7096027ljh.13 for ; Sun, 18 Dec 2022 10:56:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=oKjw4wKJ7xBV3QzfyvqW6iEzR6CzYxz06lxoVLvFcaM=; b=UWjLiSuqMGumeA7JFucD4btY/UJjSxGJn0H4e1BgoB/9L1K4zaIc5U7zAYN1Zr1Trz PEv0ZLGhb0B6ihe9EpwRokSCZ47CdjTrXYaxucZi+hepnDTHPiOL95UT/+Q6IqUBKsFb iRD+/wfWChfMK27XVJuxT2r3RZen7811lB3AO32a6VMMhOwX4GRBSMO45Vl+qfmUuLuQ EE6d/uoxy8LR+NrNtcfBauVNk4Nj71qEKYiiLDLCJia1AZF+16A8zDJpsghe1U7Dvn0E K6jF/msvAiNKhx1CjXmAd16mSjVfDiB01lSgYpwvX3JvZUM6G5xQ6HRC5R5uCjnxhT+Z Rgbw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=oKjw4wKJ7xBV3QzfyvqW6iEzR6CzYxz06lxoVLvFcaM=; b=N+X6f2rutmQyScR1N4ZsNSbBJyr4K9oACvz3drbRiAA0FI6qXKhb6YUABFMpiVPKK5 C4F4kvF8581ue9VUdq5HrJkVpQhZ3NByvK0hFEsCR/zQF79Jr9df83l3BJBu6ku+Az20 sCtg3SgZdir4XOx16ZcOh412VjShNROyyyfgAI+h1C9ZK9k+Q7njvPRaCN6YehmmxNRG 0hjK8F/YVdU5hycBYKiQa8kH0mnJSaZvO6kNJGU3gzxzmp8sLWEiIPy+pDpoTevUCbqS Wo9Rbcuh+pGaRWdAQPkfP/vAuaPuroQT9ysNYxIEBz2AlaT0eDvknEexc9G06MYxDXvN zItA== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pniq89XEQvjXKnbmcMUcXxkR0hJZ76EzailOJizP/TKUe6vjn3N e4JWN3xdNisJtrFLCHlZ38JA4uz0/xHEsXi2Xl+ybDfs X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf7aqnwUt7suCQlyzO9CN39S6Hvxhtz+b9yC3EXrdLlcva+KiQjb3sILNUo2oSPkDjRMV72RTQ5nLkt9c9iFmcs= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:a4a9:0:b0:279:c7c4:2fde with SMTP id g9-20020a2ea4a9000000b00279c7c42fdemr14020252ljm.360.1671389770036; Sun, 18 Dec 2022 10:56:10 -0800 (PST) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <9407e524-2226-6ba9-dd7f-bac635d083e3@gmail.com> <3394876.QJadu78ljV@lenovo.localdomain> In-Reply-To: From: Mark Knecht Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2022 11:55:58 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] NAS and replacing with larger drives To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000863bb305f01ec182" X-Archives-Salt: f3f3f984-8af9-4b37-9f3c-7f5d25e1eee4 X-Archives-Hash: e587a7a6a0949fbeb5b7ef9bb3c0aa7d --000000000000863bb305f01ec182 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Sun, Dec 18, 2022 at 11:39 AM Dale wrote: > > > I suspect it has something to do with this being a older system. I > wouldn't be surprised if the SATA was a older and slower version. I > guess I could google it. > You need to study your specs. Even the first version of SATA, SATA 1, was capable of 150MB/S. SATA2 does 300MB/S. This is unlikely IMO to be due to SATA specs. Have you run iperf yet as I suggested? It will easily tell you what the network performance is and takes 5 seconds in NGL. --000000000000863bb305f01ec182 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Sun, Dec 18, 2022 at 11:39 AM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
>= ;
<SNIP>
>
> I suspect it has something to do with thi= s being a older system. =C2=A0I
> wouldn't be surprised if the SA= TA was a older and slower version. =C2=A0I
> guess I could google it.=
>
You need to study your specs. Even the first version of = SATA, SATA 1,
was capable of 150MB/S. SATA2 does 300MB/S. This is= unlikely IMO
to be due to SATA specs.=C2=A0

=
Have you run iperf yet as I suggested?=C2=A0It will easily tell you wh= at the=C2=A0
network performance is and takes 5 seconds in NGL.
--000000000000863bb305f01ec182--