What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Do you believe the 2012 Mayan Prophecy? view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - The Mayan Calendar predicts the end of time: 2012. See the trailer for 2012, opening November 13.
55 Comments
- starheart, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I recently have been playing with gigabit, and agree, this article doesn't even tell half the story.
Here are some of the issues I ran into or learned about:
Gigabit network cards should be onboard AND bypass the PCI bus. You will get higher throughput than a 10/100 card with a gigabit card, but no where near gigabit speed. The problem with some onboard cards is they they are just put on the PCI bus like a PCI card.
Jumbo frames support is very helpful, and also problematic. It is helpful in that it can be the difference between only getting about 60 megabytes a second and full speed of around 118 megabytes a second. Jumbo frames support lets you set the MTU to something higher than 1500. The figure can range from 1501 to over 10000. Various cards, drivers, and switches support different figures. Being that you have changed the MTU, all devices that are on the same LAN as the network card that you set jumbo frames on also need to transmit at the same MTU. This can be problematic when you want to use something like a cheap broadband router. They only have 10/100 ports and no way to control the MTU. Which means you have to separate your LAN with jumbo frames from your LAN that provides Internet access. Another issue is the switch. It must support jumbo frames at the same figure that you plan to set the cards to. In the process of setting up gigabit I ordered a 8 port gigabit switch. After receiving it I realized I had forgotten to take jumbo frames into account, and it doesn't support jumbo frames. From research I have done on-line there is only one brand with fairly cheap gigabit switches that supports jumbo frames, SMC.
Network protocol can be an issue. Most people these days use TCP/IP. To improve reliability TCP/IP uses checksuming to make sure that the data hasn't been corrupted at some point in the process. As the throughput goes up the checksuming can become another bottleneck. Hence some cards support checksum offloading to help reduce the bottleneck. Research and work has been doing and continues on coming up with new protocols that with reduce this problem.
Cabling can also be an issue. Officially you need Cat5e or Cat6. In my case Cat5e patch cables are plentiful. You might be able to get away with Cat5 cables for short patch cables, but you will have to test them instead of just expecting them to work.
Hard drive throughput at both ends can be an issue. If it can't read the data fast enough the computer sending will have to slow down. If the computer receiving the data can't store it fast enough it will have to request the sending computer to slow down. In my case I upgrade both ends to raid5 arrays. One with four 250gb sata drives and the other to three 250gb sata drives. I am not sure either could keep up on writes.
If the hard drives can't keep up, which in most cases they can't, then file size and available memory become a factor. In my case one computer has 2gb of memory and the other has 1gb of memory. I found for CD iso files that they system with 2gb of memory could receive without a problem, but the 1gb system could not. It would just run out of memory if it tried, so it throttled the transfer. That was just with CD iso files. The situation would be even worse with DVD iso files where they are bigger than the amount of system memory. In the future it will get much worse with HD-DVD or Blue ray images that could be from around 25-200gb. Then we can't expect the amount of system memory to keep up.
Yet another factor is the software and transfer protocol used for the transfer. I normally use rsync+ssh for speed and security. But I found that the combination was limited to about 18 megabytes a second. I then tried scp, and found it was limited to about 20 megabytes a second. Then I tried rsync by itself and found it was limited to about 34 megabytes a second. Finally I tried http using wget and apache. With http I got full speed at least for a few seconds, depending on how well the rest of the system could sustain the throughput. - Keruo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3> talking big companies here
And yet you fail to understand why it's cheaper to do tape backup?
You never worked for one, atleast on it-department apparently.
> Google does daily incremental backups WITHOUT TAPES
This is where nature of data stored kicks in.
Google handles data, where sudden loss of few hundred GBs isn't an issue, they can just recrawl the net for those results.
Now would you trust your bank to backup data on harddrives only, and suddenly losing your account balance when the drives fall of the shelf or something?
Network backup isn't really an option, that would require own fiber-based WAN-network and would be rather expensive as well.
No sane person would sync account details over normal wire networks, unless those were owned by them end to end.
RAID is good system, but it's not backup solution. RAID is more about availability than data security.
If your controller dies, you could lose all your data at once.
It's good enough for most home users, but not a backup solution if you do business. - Keruo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@binarypower
Everyone who makes backups of large amount of data regularly uses tape drives.
DVDs are cheap, but have you ever tried backuping 100gigs of data daily by burning discs?
suddenly the tape recorder which can do it automatically and maybe even rotate week tapes isn't such bad idea.
RAID is only good for protected storage and possible performance improvement, it's not backup solution.
As for article, no digg, lame. - Cosine, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Why a useless article, why exactly would this be digg-worthy?
- jtollert, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Tape is slow and expensive and it's not growing in capacity to match the explosion in hard drive sizes. RAID can be a great PART of a backup system, but it's darn hard to pick up a RAID array and take it off-site. If you're not sending data off-site, you are not protected against theft, fire, and bole weevil infestations. What happens if a malicious virus or employee wipes the data on the array?
- scorpioX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This is rather basic and if you know what GbE is and what it does, then you likely already know everything in this article and if you don't know what GbE is then it's unlikely you will be transitioning to it anytime soon.
- krynsky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Article fails to mention "Jumbo Frame" support. I don't have time to explain the benefits but Google them...I recommend anyone making the jump to Gigabit to get a Jumbo Frame compatible switch and Nic's. I bought the SMC GS5 switch for ~$50. They also make an 8 port switch as well.
- minitechnik, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2gigabit = good
article = lame - deb6404, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This article isn't very helpful for those with even a cursory knowledge of GbE. No dig.
- behemothaur, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Umm - 10gig? Thought we had already done the gig thing.
No digg. - master_of_fm, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2i vote lame for the following line in the article
"The first thing that you need to consider is whether the unit that you are considering is a hub or a switch."
how many gigabit hubs have you ever seen, lets count . . . zero
also,
"The next thing that you need to check is the switch’s throughput. The switch that you select needs to support 10 / 100 / 1000 speeds on each port. While I was shopping for my switch, I ran across quite a few gigabyte switches that only supported 10 / 100 / 1000 on two ports. The remaining ports only supported 10 / 100."
that is for bridging, what a moron - mooninite, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Lame. master_of_fm summarized it nicely.
Oh yea... lets pick up a gigabit HUB!~ - dmh2000, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1this article is so full of errors and misinformation it must be meant as a joke
- linuxrebel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1plus who uses tape drives?!?!?!? omg that was like so 80's-90's..... I mean RAID.... RAID!!!!! USE F-ING RAID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ok understood, and boy howdy I do love raid. Now ... Building burns down/It's blown up by right wing extremists/Hurricane floods the town. None of these are protected by raid. However backup tapes shipped regularly to off site location. Boom! we are able to get back up and running. Tape shipping can be done overnight, minimal data loss and customer happy. - binarypower, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Vote lame on this... who cares this guy has written 300 books or whatever... he prolly wrote books on how to make a terradactyl telegraph...
- binarypower, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0one other thing (im ranting mad now...) He concludes that it is hard... umm no it's not... you can use the same cabling, cat5e+, and gigabit cards are plug and play even for linux servers.... and gigabit switches take as much knowledge as 100mb couterparts...
what a doof.. im pissed that someone like this can claim that they are any sort of expert.... - djcoolmax, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0and he does not even dare to tell you what was bought. I guess he's afraid after all the talk and if the equipment does not deliver on what was mentioned.. duhhhh...
- CannedCorn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0You don't need to watch out for this stuff, they arent trying to trick you, its obvious stuff... obviously your getting a switch if you want one, are there even gigabit hubs?!... and yes the ones with two ports are for bridging... this is lame.
- krynsky, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Oh, I forgot I blogged about my conversion. It's available here:
http://www.krynsky.com/my-adventure-in-considering-to-upgrade-to-a-gigabit-switch/ - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Why would you care about gigabyte internet, unless your running your own LAN, and a rather large one at that."
((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( Official digg dumass award goes to Bostonsox )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) - Bostonsox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Why would you care about gigabyte internet, unless your running your own LAN, and a rather large one at that.
- AndrewJ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Go to Circuit City and get a dumb Netgear Gigabit router. Not one problem that he states matters at all.
- rideaurocks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Bah what amazes me is that the thread is full of negative comments but almost 200 people (and counting found it useful). As did I. I know quite a bit about networking but didn't know that cat5 was no good for gigabit networks. And his experience crimping cat6 was interesting. What I don't get is why choose a switch over a router? Surely he's not getting THAT many public IP addresses from his ISP.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Waahhh, CAT6 is too thick! And he doesn't even know the difference between gigabit and gigabyte. What a loser!
Can I negative digg? - floam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I haven't read this but let me guess: Network cards, CAT6, drivers, and routing/switching hardware.
- stevey5036, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0how do you know if you have a cat5/5+/6 cable? i have a gigabit router and the connection in windows shows up as 1.0gbps, so i guess its a cat5+?
- splitsixty, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0My{tape} back-ups always time out....and we just got gigabit switches!
go... 802.11n
"If a company really needs to do 100mb backups per day at 30 cents per GB x2 (for raid) is $60 per day. roughly $21,000 per year." (where did you get the 30 cents figure from?) - Avocaz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Despite the fact that article is fairly useless , i find some of the comments even more stupid like the peeps who say Tapes are outdated , I work as a Sys.Admin for Tyco Electronics and i can say WorldWide Tapes are still the most used backup medium for a business 1.Tapes degrade slowest of all and 2nd pure economics. So if you have your Dell pc at home and burn your Mail on DVD once a week STFU !!!!
- binarypower, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@keruo
Tape is a dead technology. Slow, expensive, outdated.... companies who still use tape drives still rely on fax machines and the likes....
Do the research for yourself... Daily incremental backups are more efficient than tape drives, last longer, less hassle, cheaper.... If a company really needs to do 100mb backups per day at 30 cents per GB x2 (for raid) is $60 per day. roughly $21,000 per year. Even external drives. Plus they can be reused plenty of times over and over.
Tape drives cost about the same for the same amount, arent raid (so lets say if you spill a diet coke on your tape, that days backups are gone. They are more prone to the elements, they are SLOOOWW, and they require someone staffed at all times to do a daily backup (unless you opt for some automatic tape jogger that costs in the $20k+ range).
One network file server with terabytes of storage, less money per year, less staff involvement, automatic updates, RAID, PERMANENT STORAGE SOLUTION, and the likes means hard drives win in such a major way, but i'd like to see your example, (other than a "everyone uses it so it must be the best" angle) - vonskippy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Thank you Captain Obvious. Too bad I can't get my time and bandwidth back I pissed away reading that content free article.
- initsix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Not that I am against GigE, but I think his time would be been better spent working on a incremental backup solution such as rsync to save on the amount of data he had to transfer every day.
- binarypower, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@keruo
>Google handles data, where sudden loss of few hundred GBs isn't an issue, they can just recrawl the net for those results
Sure.... yeah my email is publically available on the net... think realistically. Google has the same data requirements of any bank, information they CANNOT LOSE. They have one of the worlds largest databases and they cannot afford to lose any info. You could say it is mission critical due to almost every one of their products rely on backing up data and yet they do it without a single tape..... Call me a visionary but I see you as behind the times. It is for sure not cheaper to use tapes, especially when you consider the WORM nature of tapes. The price per GB is lower for HD (including infrastructure and staffing requirements, all part of a CIO's main goal of reducing) and is only dropping.
As for the "off site" nature, yes, leased fiber lines are cheaper than you think, especially within one metro area. Less than the cost of trucking the tapes daily to an off site location for the same distance. (which trucks carrying tapes are prone to accidents!)
Come on this is Digg.com where technology is on the bleeding edge and no one else agrees with me that tapes are a dying if not dead technology? - saleens281, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Why gagabit? LAN parties. For us, gigabit is a must (even faster would be nice -- we are working on getting fiber). When you have hundreds of clients and dozens of servers, bandwidth on the LAN is very important."
Uhh... what exactly do you think "fiber" is going to buy you? Gigabit is gigabit, and I doubt you'll be dropping 40k on a 10gbit director switch for your lan party anytime soon... - saleens281, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Article fails to mention "Jumbo Frame" support. I don't have time to explain the benefits but Google them...I recommend anyone making the jump to Gigabit to get a Jumbo Frame compatible switch and Nic's. I bought the SMC GS5 switch for ~$50. They also make an 8 port switch as well."
Uhh... ya... except you can't pass that traffic outside of your lan. And once you enable it you can't selectively decide what is using jumbo frames and what isn't. Talk about BAD advice. - jdebner, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I am pretty sure that you don't need cat5e to use gigabit I think that guy did a whole lot of work for nothing... factual error
- spikey04, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@saleens
fiber is going to buy them a better backbone to the network so they can connect more Gb lines with out a performance drop... - Bboby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Simon 20 years later...
- Keruo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0> Why would you care about gigabyte internet,
If you happen to live in suitable area, such as japan or korea, you might get gigabit internet at home.
Its available in some parts of sweden also, but not that common there yet from what I've heard.
But it all comes down to economics, if the government is aggressively funding for the country's network infrastructure(sweden)
or the geographical area has extremely dense population(japan,korea), it's cheap to pull fast internet at every door, even with ethernet. - Bubba99, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Why gagabit? LAN parties. For us, gigabit is a must (even faster would be nice -- we are working on getting fiber). When you have hundreds of clients and dozens of servers, bandwidth on the LAN is very important.
- TokenUser, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@binarypower: Why use tape bqackups? Yes, disc is cheap ... but in many organisations a weekly full backup, with daily incrementals, followed by taking those backup tapes off site for safety, and soon the tape is far more convenient than a disc.
If you think otherwise, thats great. You might only need a single copy of your MP3 collection and online backup to another HDD is perfect ... but I suspect your bank and insurance companies (you are old enough for a bank account of your own right?) would have a different perspective about losing frequently changing and vital data.
No digg for article... and the rest of his writing isn't much better. - velocipenguin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This article is completely worthless for people who have even the most basic understanding of networking concepts.
- byrons, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@jtollert
I'm happy someone got in there before I did, I mean, if binarywhatisface can't see the benefit of a small high capacity tape then there is no hope. Yes, they are susceptible to damage etc, but there is one simple solution for this, look after them.
I use tapes, I love tapes, I think tapes will still be around for a long time to come. Love live the humble tape!
Article is a little lame but I hope it does help some poor soul. - tbear, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Not to be to critical, yes it's all basic knowledge once you know it. But this guy should research it more. I mean bit to byte is an 8x difference. I agree the comments above, at least some of them are really lame!
As a side note to create a cross over you swap the green and orange on only one side of the cable. Giga cross over! Now if my X-Box had a gig-nic I would be set. - Niteryder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+010GE is here, I just wonder how much of it is 2.5 + 2.5 + 2.5 + 2.5 as opposed to it being all on 1 chip with supporting chips. GigE over fiber is better IMHO, and 2.5GigE fiber rings will be here for some time
still...
When I can connect to the WAN with it from home then I will find it useful outside of carrier class environments - linker3000, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Welcome to Digg where lame inaccurate articles are branded useful by the very same people who keenly need accurate knowledge in order to know whether the articles they are reading are accurate or not.
Circular reference detected...iug;aaNO CARRIER - binarypower, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@linuxrebel
If you are backing up 100GB per day then your company can afford to host a fileserver offsite in several locations to do daily backups.
@tokenuser
talking big companies here, not about your mp3 collection, sorry, go to sleep now young child
@byrons
old people who use old technology because they are comfortable with it, need to retire so the younger smater generation can take your place, goodnight old man... time for sleep
@everyone who still uses tapes within their companies...
Google does daily incremental backups WITHOUT TAPES, they use all harddrives in RAID format off site and they are a major company with a LOT to backup every day!
Get with the times, just because you are loyal doesn't mean you cant open your eyes. - n0xie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Date Launched: May 03, 2005
Last Updated: May 03, 2005"
Right... Def. no DiGG - capsela, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0He didn't cover hard drive transfer rates which might have a hard time keeping up with GB Ethernet.
- Niteryder, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I worked on this technology at http://www.luminous.com/
- binarypower, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0plus who uses tape drives?!?!?!? omg that was like so 80's-90's..... I mean RAID.... RAID!!!!! USE F-ING RAID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Show 51 - 55 of 55 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is