Getting a home server that has two separate networks each working at full speed
Getting a home server that has two separate networks each working at full speed
I have a question that experts in networking can probably answer, but I know there are some basic rules before you read this... I run a home media server with Windows Server 2012R2 on a basic Xeon computer. This computer has two ethernet ports, both are 1 gigabit (1 Gbps) and they look like this: .251 and .252. There is no special teaming or weird settings on the server or the switch. From my point of view as a media server, there is plenty of speed. I can run three 4k videos at once without any trouble.
I am doing a lot of re-encoding video files which usually are between 10 GB and 70 GB big. On my current network, I see speeds like 115 MB/s - that basically uses up the full 1 Gbps speed. I want to find a faster way and think 2.5 gigabit (2.5 Gbps) is possible without too much money. I was wondering if I could add a 2.5 Gbps adapter directly to my server so my two big PCs can transfer these large files faster.
I know that I will need a switch with 2.5 Gbps ports as well. I tried figuring out how to direct the file transfers from those two PCs to the 2.5 Gbps port on the server. Usually, when I connect to the server, I use the server name, but I tested setting up shared folders on one of my big PCs using both IPs (.251 and .252). What I learned is that no matter which folder I copied, the traffic split evenly between those two ports. My PC ethernet was at 990 MB/s and the two server ports were at 440-450 MB/s.
The question (finally!) is: if I add a router with 2.5 Gbps ports to my home network (since both PCs already have them), would I get about 2 Gbps transfers to the server because the system splits the data over those two 1 Gbps ethernet ports? There is basically no other traffic happening when I do this, so all of my network and switch bandwidth is available during file transfers. Thanks in advance for any thoughts.
I have already tested how fast my RAID 6 array can go and found it to support sustained writes close to 400 MB/s - it looks like the 1 Gbps network connection is just one thing stopping me from doubling my transfer speed.
I'd suggest using a switch with one or two 10-gigabit ports. Then you need to plug in a 10GE card into your server. A multi-gig switch can handle speeds of 1, 2, 5, or even 10 Gigabytes per second. Netgear has some good ones like that.
Thanks for getting back to me!! Unfortunately my little mini-itx board has just one PCIE slot and it has a RAID card in it. I can use the two existing 1Gbps ports or buy a USB adapter that says 2.5Gbps, which is easier than finding another way. Also, 10Gbps switches are way too expensive for what I need. I can get nearly 400MB/s writing speed to my server using a USB SSD, so the 2.5Gbps from the adapter shouldn't be a problem at all in terms of bandwidth. The two computers I send files from already have 2.5Gbps ethernet connections, and I never try to send from both of them to the server at once. So here is my main question: will using the existing two 1Gbps ports give me basically 2 Gbps throughput when sending with a 2.5Gbps network?
It depends on which operating system you're using on the server. Most Windows installs won't even let you use two different IPs at once. Even on Linux, it's tricky to try that thing too. If you just want one file transfer, you probably aren't going to need two connections unless you're using a tool like torrent. Your best bet is to connect via 2.5G through USB if that option is available. Make sure the port can handle that speed. You don't really have a good way to combine two ethernet ports together. Some things called link aggregation let you use two ports at once, but they only work with specific switches and don't actually make one connection faster than before. It might let your two machines send data separately using just 1 gigabit each, but sometimes it ends up putting both on the same connection so you have to leave one unused.
This used to be my guess until I actually tried it out. When I moved a big file (like 100 GB) through File Explorer, each of my servers' ethernet ports seemed to only get half the traffic. My PC had just one port and sent about 990 MB/s straight away (which was its full speed). On the server side, both of its two ports were sending data at around 440-450 MB/s right at the same time - so each port got exactly half the file's worth of traffic. This happened even though I only mapped one folder to just one IP address on my PC, which was totally surprising! The server had Windows Server 2012R2 Essentials with a small ASRock mini-ITX board that had two ethernet ports and an IPMI port. There wasn't any other internet traffic when I ran the test. I really don't know why the system is splitting things up like this between those two server ports. I'm going to get a new 5-port switch with 2.5 Gbps speed just to see what happens - hopefully it will take my PC's full 2.5 Gbps traffic and let each port get one solid 1 Gbps stream at the same time, which would double how fast things go!
PCIe x1 in Gen3 is just 1gbps if full speed goes two ways. If you have a mini itx board and plug an x1 slot, you get only 1Gbps even with the best card. USB 3.0 can go up to 5Gbps, so I'm using a USB 3.0 to 2.5gb ethernet adapter instead. Watch out when buying one though; my USB 3.0 to 5gbe adapter gets super hot and stops working often. It's too warm to touch anymore. I've stopped using them.
@ wyliec2 There is a simple way to fix this. If your computer has an open slot for PCIe x4 that fits a 10G adapter, here is what you should do: Buy a 5-port 10 Gigabit desktop switch as the top choice for its speed. This model, called the TL-SX105, can handle up to 100 Gbps of data transfer at once. It offers very reliable connections and speeds that make it perfect for gaming and small offices or homes. You can find this one on their official site and also on Amazon. The switch costs $270 in the United States. This is exactly the same thing I use for my home setup, which includes servers running ESXi and storage using iSCSI over a network VLAN. To save money, you could get an older Intel NIC that costs between $100 and $120. Alternatively, you can buy a TP-Link 10Gbe adapter for just $100, which is easy to find and install. Once the client side is set up with those speeds, your server bandwidth problem is actually solved. If needed, you can add more network cards later if you want to keep using full speed on the desktop.
Cool results! After adding a 2.5 Gbps switch ($168 for an 8-port) and connecting the two server LAN ports (each at 1 Gbps), my PC with a motherboard capable of up to 5 Gbps ethernet got speeds between 1.2 and 1.3 Gbps from it, while each server port only received half that traffic. With this setup, I was getting better than 0.975 Gbps using just 1 Gbps switches. I bought an ASUS 2.5 Gbps USB 3.1 adapter for $30 because the servers have USB 3.0 ports and I tested with a portable SSD connected via USB, transferring near 400 MB/s to my RAID 6 array. When all three server LAN ports were plugged into the 2.5 Gbps switch instead of their original ones, traffic sometimes split across all three, or sometimes just went to the USB adapter. I swapped the two original 1 Gbps ports back onto the 1 Gbps switch and connected the USB 2.5 Gbps port to the new 2.5 Gbps switch where my PC is plugged in. This setup seems to keep all PC-Server traffic on the 2.5 Gbps LAN. Copying files from the server to my PC only gives me 1.3 to 1.4 Gbps speeds, but copying from my PC to the server hits 2.3 to 2.4 Gbps—copying to the server is what I use most often, and it looks great so far! I should note that the PC's source or destination files are on NVMe SSDs, so that isn't slowing things down either. Also, the TP-Link switch says it supports 2.5 Gbps with Cat 5e cables; I tested using the ethernet wiring in my house, which is rated 5e, and got full 2.5 Gbps connectivity. It seems to work just as well as I hoped!