File Transfer Rates  NFS
This is a discussion on File Transfer Rates  NFS ; Hello all 
I have a bit of a quandry and I'm not sure how to even begin the math
to solve it. I have a user that has a requirement to transfer a 250 
650Gb database across the ...

File Transfer Rates
Hello all 
I have a bit of a quandry and I'm not sure how to even begin the math
to solve it. I have a user that has a requirement to transfer a 250 
650Gb database across the network (WAN) in aprox 6 to 8 hours. I'm
doing the math but I think i'm going in circles as far as figuring out
how much bandwidth they need. Anyone have a decent formula to figure
this out with? I'm about at wits end!
Thanks in advance!!

Re: File Transfer Rates
mcechman@adelphia.net wrote:
> I have a bit of a quandry and I'm not sure how to even begin the
> math to solve it. I have a user that has a requirement to transfer
> a 250  650Gb database across the network (WAN) in aprox 6 to 8
> hours. I'm doing the math but I think i'm going in circles as far
> as figuring out how much bandwidth they need. Anyone have a decent
> formula to figure this out with? I'm about at wits end! Thanks in
> advance!!
I suspect it would be akin to solving:
"Jane has 6 hours to travel from Washington, DC to San Francisco, a
distance of ~2400 miles. At what speed must Jane travel to accomplish
that task."
keeping track of course, of the units you used as you look to convert
your GBytes of data and Hours of transfer time to whatever units are
used to describe the bandwidth of your WAN. I would suggest you use
the maximum size of database and the minimum allowed time when doing
the calculations.
rick jones

The computing industry isn't as much a game of "Follow The Leader" as
it is one of "Ring Around the Rosy" or perhaps "Duck Duck Goose."
 Rick Jones
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

Re: File Transfer Rates
mcechman@adelphia.net wrote:
: Hello all 
: I have a bit of a quandry and I'm not sure how to even begin the math
: to solve it. I have a user that has a requirement to transfer a 250 
: 650Gb database across the network (WAN) in aprox 6 to 8 hours. I'm
: doing the math but I think i'm going in circles as far as figuring out
: how much bandwidth they need. Anyone have a decent formula to figure
: this out with? I'm about at wits end!
: Thanks in advance!!
Assuming this isn't some kind of homework question, in the real world there
are too many variables to come up with an equation and say it's the rule to
be followed.
Also being asked on a group that deals with nfs, whatever servers and
operating systems you are dealing with is about as important as the
bandwidth between them.
In a nutshell, a 100mb network isn't going to work. This sort of leaves the
gigabit ethernet as your only option. I don't have any real world experience
with it but I assume the performance of it over 100mb ethernet is similar to
100mb over 10mb.
To estimate the time involved with transfering files, you have to keep in
mind the ever going conflict of terminology with megabits and megabytes.
Ethernet (along with modems) generally use megabits in describing the speed
while file sizes (reading the directory off a hard drive) is in megabytes.
One issue to address is the fiddley bits (pun intended) with how many bits
are in a byte (generally argued as 8 or 10) and if 1K of data is 1000 bytes
or 1024. Personally I don't care. Rounding every thing off to 10/1000 is
about as accurate as using 8/1024, real world.
To solve your problem, assume you only have a 10mb ethernet to deal with,
which was the state of the art 10 years ago. Basically the speed of it means
it can handle 10,000,000 BITS of data per second. The file on you hard drive
is measured in bytes, which by my rules are 10 bits to a byte. Dividing the
10,000,000 by 10 means 1,000,000 bytes of data from your hard drive file can
be transmitted over the ethernet per second.
So if you have the 350meg version of the Paris Hilton sex video, two
computers and a 10mb ethernet between them, your file is 350,000,000 bytes
and your network can transfer 1,000,000 bytes per second, the time it would
take to transfer it would be 350,000,000/1,000,000 or 350 seconds. Divide
that by 60 (seconds in a minute) and you have "about 6 minutes" as your
answer.
Leaving everything the same except changing the 10mb ethernet to 100mb, your
data now passes at 10,000,000 bytes per second, or 10 times faster than the
10mb ethernet. So now, 350,000,000/10,000,000 is 35 seconds.
Moving the same idea from 100mb to 1gb network, the result is 3.5 seconds.
Moving to your question, you ask about moving 250gb to 650gb of data within
a time limit of 68 hours. Keep in mind that data size is a 3x slop factor
and probably should be narrowed down a bit.
Anyway, forget about the time limit and plug in what you know. Assume to
have a 100mb network, totally idle, a crossover cable going between two
boxes.
On the low side, you have 250,000,000,000 bytes of data and a network
(100mb) that passes 10,000,000 bytes (not bits) per second. That is 25,000
seconds or 25,000/60 is 416 minutes and divide that by 60 to get hours and
that comes out to about 7 hours.
So in this case, if your file stays around 250GB and you have a full
bandwidth 100mb network available, you could get away with using a plain old
100mb connection.
Naturally if the file grows to 500GB, your time doubles to 14 hours and if
it peaks at the 750GB, it'll take almost a day (21 hours).
Again, assuming gigabit carries up proportionally, divide all of that by ten
so 250GB would be 41.6 minutes, 500GB is around 83 minutes, 750GB is around
2 hours.
The point to make is simply that 10/100 isn't going to cut it. 100mb is
barely going to fit the theory and only if it is working 100%.
As I mentioned earlier, taking in other factors, everything from other
network traffic, switch/hub counts, speed of your disks to server hardware
and operating systems, the "real world" answer could be easily off by 100%
and more.
bruce
bje@ripco.com

Re: File Transfer Rates
"Bruce Esquibel" wrote in message
news:e0tpap$msp$1@e250.ripco.com...
> mcechman@adelphia.net wrote:
> : Hello all 
> : I have a bit of a quandry and I'm not sure how to even begin the math
> : to solve it. I have a user that has a requirement to transfer a 250 
> : 650Gb database across the network (WAN) in aprox 6 to 8 hours. I'm
> : doing the math but I think i'm going in circles as far as figuring out
> : how much bandwidth they need. Anyone have a decent formula to figure
> : this out with? I'm about at wits end!
> : Thanks in advance!!
>
>
> Assuming this isn't some kind of homework question, in the real world
> there
> are too many variables to come up with an equation and say it's the rule
> to
> be followed.
>
> Also being asked on a group that deals with nfs, whatever servers and
> operating systems you are dealing with is about as important as the
> bandwidth between them.
>
> In a nutshell, a 100mb network isn't going to work. This sort of leaves
> the
> gigabit ethernet as your only option. I don't have any real world
> experience
> with it but I assume the performance of it over 100mb ethernet is similar
> to
> 100mb over 10mb.
>
> To estimate the time involved with transfering files, you have to keep in
> mind the ever going conflict of terminology with megabits and megabytes.
> Ethernet (along with modems) generally use megabits in describing the
> speed
> while file sizes (reading the directory off a hard drive) is in megabytes.
>
> One issue to address is the fiddley bits (pun intended) with how many bits
> are in a byte (generally argued as 8 or 10) and if 1K of data is 1000
> bytes
> or 1024. Personally I don't care. Rounding every thing off to 10/1000 is
> about as accurate as using 8/1024, real world.
>
> To solve your problem, assume you only have a 10mb ethernet to deal with,
> which was the state of the art 10 years ago. Basically the speed of it
> means
> it can handle 10,000,000 BITS of data per second. The file on you hard
> drive
> is measured in bytes, which by my rules are 10 bits to a byte. Dividing
> the
> 10,000,000 by 10 means 1,000,000 bytes of data from your hard drive file
> can
> be transmitted over the ethernet per second.
>
> So if you have the 350meg version of the Paris Hilton sex video, two
> computers and a 10mb ethernet between them, your file is 350,000,000 bytes
> and your network can transfer 1,000,000 bytes per second, the time it
> would
> take to transfer it would be 350,000,000/1,000,000 or 350 seconds. Divide
> that by 60 (seconds in a minute) and you have "about 6 minutes" as your
> answer.
>
> Leaving everything the same except changing the 10mb ethernet to 100mb,
> your
> data now passes at 10,000,000 bytes per second, or 10 times faster than
> the
> 10mb ethernet. So now, 350,000,000/10,000,000 is 35 seconds.
>
> Moving the same idea from 100mb to 1gb network, the result is 3.5 seconds.
>
> Moving to your question, you ask about moving 250gb to 650gb of data
> within
> a time limit of 68 hours. Keep in mind that data size is a 3x slop factor
> and probably should be narrowed down a bit.
>
> Anyway, forget about the time limit and plug in what you know. Assume to
> have a 100mb network, totally idle, a crossover cable going between two
> boxes.
>
> On the low side, you have 250,000,000,000 bytes of data and a network
> (100mb) that passes 10,000,000 bytes (not bits) per second. That is 25,000
> seconds or 25,000/60 is 416 minutes and divide that by 60 to get hours and
> that comes out to about 7 hours.
>
> So in this case, if your file stays around 250GB and you have a full
> bandwidth 100mb network available, you could get away with using a plain
> old
> 100mb connection.
>
> Naturally if the file grows to 500GB, your time doubles to 14 hours and if
> it peaks at the 750GB, it'll take almost a day (21 hours).
>
> Again, assuming gigabit carries up proportionally, divide all of that by
> ten
> so 250GB would be 41.6 minutes, 500GB is around 83 minutes, 750GB is
> around
> 2 hours.
>
> The point to make is simply that 10/100 isn't going to cut it. 100mb is
> barely going to fit the theory and only if it is working 100%.
>
> As I mentioned earlier, taking in other factors, everything from other
> network traffic, switch/hub counts, speed of your disks to server hardware
> and operating systems, the "real world" answer could be easily off by 100%
> and more.
>
> bruce
> bje@ripco.com
Bruce,
Most of the theory here is solid however realworld variables may affect
the outcome.
Other variables:
Interconnect type: 10/100/1000/other ?
Transport layer is: UDP or TCP ?
Network loss: ? percentage of packets lost ?
Duplex: Full, or Half.
Retransmit timeout value ?
Transport filesystem ? (NFS Version 2, Version 3, or CIFs, ftp,
rcp,scp )?
Transfer size ?
Jumbo frames ?
NIC type and buss ? ISA, PCI, PCIX, 32 bit, 64 bit ?
Network switches ? Any congestion here ?
Operating systems at both ends of circuit ?
Disk controllers at both ends of the circuit.
Number and type of disks, at both ends of the circuit.
NVRAM, Disk caches at both ends of the circuit.
Examples of where simple theory goes wrong.
In theory above, a gigabit link would do 100 Mbyes/sec, BUT,
if the transport filesystem is NFS Version 2, and writes are
sync with the server storage (as required by the RFC), and
the server receiving the file has a old SCSI drive, then the
throughput would be 5 to 10 Mbytes/sec, not 100 Mbytes/sec.
In theory above, a gigabit link would do 100 Mbyes/sec, BUT
if the transport filesystem is NFS version 3, and the NFS client
has a terabyte of memory and fast backplane, then the NFS
client could appear to be transferring data at 800 to 1600
Mbytes/sec.
If the client had 10 NICs and was using port aggregation, then
the data could be flowing async to the server at these rates too...
In theory above, a gigabit link would do 100 Mbyes/sec, BUT
the network filesystem type has overhead. NFS, CIFs, have
some internal overhead that will reduce the throughput. Other
remote filesystems have significantly lower overhead, and
different internal mechanisms. Such as... clustered filesystems:
Polyserve, GFS, GPFS, Lustre, Panasys.....
The interconnect type is also a variable.
10Mbit > ~ 1 Mbyte/sec
100Mbit > ~10 Mbytes/sec
1Gbit > ~100 Mbytes/sec
Quadrics > ~300 to 800 Mbytes/sec (depending on type)
10GigE > ~ 1 Gbytes/sec
Infiniband > ~1 Gbytes/sec
There are many variables in the real world that can cause
over simplifications to become very unrealistic.
To model the throughput one would need to know the
speeds and feeds of each component in the path from
end to end.
There are many variables in the real world :)
Enjoy,
Postmaster

Re: File Transfer Rates
mcechman@adelphia.net wrote:
> Hello all 
> I have a bit of a quandry and I'm not sure how to even begin the math
> to solve it. I have a user that has a requirement to transfer a 250 
> 650Gb database across the network (WAN) in aprox 6 to 8 hours.
I have found database backup files compress very well, maybe 10:1.
That should help.
 glen