Multi-Client Performance - CIFS

We put the LenovoEMC ix4-300d and WD EX4 through some IOMeter tests with a CIFS share being accessed from up to 25 VMs simultaneously. The following four graphs show the total available bandwidth and the average response time while being subject to different types of workloads through IOMeter. IOMeter also reports various other metrics of interest such as maximum response time, read and write IOPS, separate read and write bandwidth figures etc. Other interesting aspects from our IOMeter benchmarking run can be found here for the ix4-300d and here for the EX4.

WD My Cloud EX4 Multi-Client CIFS Performance - 100% Sequential Reads


 

WD My Cloud EX4 Multi-Client CIFS Performance - Max Throughput - 50% Reads


 

WD My Cloud EX4 Multi-Client CIFS Performance - Random 8K - 70% Reads


 

WD My Cloud EX4 Multi-Client CIFS Performance - Real Life - 65% Reads


Note that the scales on the graphs are different for the EX4 and the ix4-300d. While the ix4-300d is more than able to saturate a single GbE link, the WD EX4 struggles. In fact, the only saving grace is that the degradation in performance is not much as the number of clients go up, but, then, the initial performance itself was not very impressive. However, for home users who are the target market for the EX4, this may not be a very big concern. The other odd result was that the ix4-300d tended to choke on the rapid 50% sequential read / 50% sequential write test as the number of clients increased. Note that these benchmarks were done with firmware version 3.3.4.29856. Since then, LenovoEMC has released a number of firmware updates with various improvements which might have possibly fixed the issue. In any case, for 5 to 10 simultaneous clients, the performance of the ix4-300d far exceeds that of the EX4.

Single Client Performance - CIFS and NFS on Linux Miscellaneous Factors and Final Words
Comments Locked

38 Comments

View All Comments

  • Navvie - Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - link

    I am amazed that a torrent client is included in the Lenovo machine. I wonder how many customers will put that to honest, law abiding use?

    Although RAID6 has a big impact on capacity when dealing with four drives, I'd really like to see those numbers. I would be disappointed not to see those numbers at 5+ drives.
  • Beany2013 - Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - link

    I've found the torrent client pretty useful on my Syno DS214+ - if I find I need to download an ISO for a VM appliance or distro from work, I can dial into my NAS at home, and tell it to kick off the download while I'm out at work.

    Yes, you can use it for nefarious purposes, but that's down to the user - I could use a car to mow down some grannies at a bus stop or ram-raid a convenience store, but that doesn't mean we should ban cars.

    (my word, that as an atrocious analogy. I shall flagellate myself later as punishment)

    Also, nice to see that The Registers quick review a few weeks ago wasn't wrong about the performance of that WD unit, it's bloody pathetic.
  • ddriver - Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - link

    Torrents are not intrinsically illegal.
  • Death666Angel - Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - link

    Why would you use RAID6 with 4 disks? Why not just RAID 10? RAID 6 only makes sense to me once you go to 5 and more.
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - link

    Possibilities:

    A) It's provided as a feature check.
    B) Leaving it in reduces the number of changes vs a baseline firmware that is also used for larger models.
    C) If the enclosure supports a way to add external drives to an array. (doubtful)

    I'm guessing a combination of A and B.
  • Death666Angel - Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - link

    1 and 2 only answer the question of "why should they have it" not "why would you use it". :)
  • PEJUman - Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - link

    R6 can tolerate 2 any disks failure.
    R10 can tolerate 1 disk failure, maybe 2 (if both disks from the same stripe failed, you're hosed). I tend to think R10 as a higher performing R1, not a dual disk failure redundancy.

    Nonetheless, I agree that the R6 usability on a 4 disks array is quite dubious.
  • Navvie - Thursday, February 27, 2014 - link

    RAID6 would allow any two drives to fail without a loss of data. RAID10 also allows two drive failures, but only if those two drives don't mirror each other. Drives are more likely to fail while reconstructing a failed drive. In a RAID10 setup the failed drive is being rebuilt from data on just one drive, if that drive also fails? Bye bye data.

    RAID1, RAID10 offers no better reliability than RAID1.
    RAID6 has something like 8-10x the reliability of RAID1, and 100x of RAID5.

    Adding RAID6 numbers to reviews as this would allow devices with 4 bays and up to be tested consistently - assuming the firmware supported RAID6.
  • powerwiz - Thursday, February 27, 2014 - link

    Generally any NAS comes with a bit-torrent client. Lacies do I know for certain as I have a Lacie NAS. Works well to.

    Torrents if you do not know were created by University researchers to distribute large amounts of data fast. What you use it for is up to you. Take the internet..the biggest money maker is still porn. You can get a college degree via the internet but it seems worldwide its main use is porn. All up to the user.
  • vanel86 - Monday, March 3, 2014 - link

    The torrent client within lifelines tends to corrupts downloads if the torrent relies on DHT(if it relies on DHT only it won't even start). When i download files out of it (linuxes iso what the hell are you thinking :P) i need to run those files out of utorrent to check if they are fine or not(most cases require a 1% redownload each time)

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now