Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.raspberry-pi > #9265 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Seymore4Head <Seymore4Head@Hotmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-08-01 16:46 -0400 |
| Last post | 2015-08-02 18:53 +0000 |
| Articles | 12 — 8 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.raspberry-pi
Would a Raspberry Pi work for file sharing web sites? Seymore4Head <Seymore4Head@Hotmail.invalid> - 2015-08-01 16:46 -0400
Re: Would a Raspberry Pi work for file sharing web sites? "A. Dumas" <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> - 2015-08-02 02:26 +0200
Re: Would a Raspberry Pi work for file sharing web sites? druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2015-08-03 22:21 +0100
Re: Would a Raspberry Pi work for file sharing web sites? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-08-04 07:40 +0100
Re: Would a Raspberry Pi work for file sharing web sites? David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-08-04 07:49 +0100
Re: Would a Raspberry Pi work for file sharing web sites? Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2015-08-04 20:29 +0100
Re: Would a Raspberry Pi work for file sharing web sites? druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2015-08-04 20:30 +0100
Re: Would a Raspberry Pi work for file sharing web sites? David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-08-05 08:16 +0100
Re: Would a Raspberry Pi work for file sharing web sites? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-08-02 01:40 +0100
Re: Would a Raspberry Pi work for file sharing web sites? cl@isbd.net - 2015-08-02 09:48 +0100
Re: Would a Raspberry Pi work for file sharing web sites? Seymore4Head <Seymore4Head@Hotmail.invalid> - 2015-08-02 12:06 -0400
Re: Would a Raspberry Pi work for file sharing web sites? ray carter <ray@zianet.com> - 2015-08-02 18:53 +0000
| From | Seymore4Head <Seymore4Head@Hotmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-01 16:46 -0400 |
| Subject | Would a Raspberry Pi work for file sharing web sites? |
| Message-ID | <7abqra5rr4gd5dkebs70mnn5sn056ggvuc@4ax.com> |
What I would like to do is get a Raspberry pi 2 and hook it to either a network connection or to a USB network card. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA5YB2J42086 I assume I also need a 2T external USB drive and a 32G microSD card. I was planning on using Teamviewer to access the PI and use FireFox for web sharing sites. Will kind of transfer speeds can the PI handle? I have a couple of sites that will transfer at 400KB/s. I might also try using SABnzbd. Is the Raspberry Pi 2 up to the task?
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "A. Dumas" <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-02 02:26 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <55bd63a7$0$2837$e4fe514c@news2.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #9265 |
On 01/08/2015 22:46, Seymore4Head wrote: > What I would like to do is get a Raspberry pi 2 and hook it to either > a network connection or to a USB network card. > [...] Will kind of transfer speeds can the PI > handle? I have a couple of sites that will transfer at 400KB/s. > [...] Is the Raspberry Pi 2 up to the task? Not really, or fine, depending on your expectations. 400 kilobyte or 400 kilobit per second? The Pi (1 or 2) has only one internal USB hub and the ethernet plug is also connected via USB so ultimately all file transfer and network traffic must go over just one USB connection. That's a bottleneck and will drastically limit the theoretical speeds of 480 Mbit/s of USB 2.0 and 100 Mbit/s of Fast Ethernet (which you wouldn't get anyway, even with with the fastest PC).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | druck <news@druck.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-03 22:21 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mpoltv$7bo$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9267 |
On 02/08/2015 01:26, A. Dumas wrote: > Not really, or fine, depending on your expectations. 400 kilobyte or 400 > kilobit per second? The Pi (1 or 2) has only one internal USB hub and > the ethernet plug is also connected via USB so ultimately all file > transfer and network traffic must go over just one USB connection. The Pi B can do at least 1MB/s from its SD card to Ethernet. > That's a bottleneck and will drastically limit the theoretical speeds of > 480 Mbit/s of USB 2.0 and 100 Mbit/s of Fast Ethernet (which you > wouldn't get anyway, even with with the fastest PC). The fastest PC's can saturate gigabit Ethernet, just about anything can do 100MB/s ---druck
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-04 07:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mppmp9$qlt$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #9292 |
On 03/08/15 22:21, druck wrote: > On 02/08/2015 01:26, A. Dumas wrote: >> Not really, or fine, depending on your expectations. 400 kilobyte or 400 >> kilobit per second? The Pi (1 or 2) has only one internal USB hub and >> the ethernet plug is also connected via USB so ultimately all file >> transfer and network traffic must go over just one USB connection. > > The Pi B can do at least 1MB/s from its SD card to Ethernet. > >> That's a bottleneck and will drastically limit the theoretical speeds of >> 480 Mbit/s of USB 2.0 and 100 Mbit/s of Fast Ethernet (which you >> wouldn't get anyway, even with with the fastest PC). > > The fastest PC's can saturate gigabit Ethernet, just about anything can > do 100MB/s > I certainly get 100Mbps speeds between two Linux machines of not particularly modern flavour, here, over 100Mbps ethernet... > ---druck > -- New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in someone else's pocket.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-04 07:49 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mppn7m$345$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9292 |
On 03/08/2015 22:21, druck wrote: [] > The fastest PC's can saturate gigabit Ethernet, just about anything can > do 100MB/s > > ---druck Do you mean bytes or bits? 100 MB/s or 100 Mbps? -- Cheers, David Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-04 20:29 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <20150804202922.59f322ec@ntlworld.com> |
| In reply to | #9296 |
On Tue, 4 Aug 2015 07:49:58 +0100 David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: > On 03/08/2015 22:21, druck wrote: > [] > > The fastest PC's can saturate gigabit Ethernet, just about anything > > can do 100MB/s > > > > ---druck > > Do you mean bytes or bits? 100 MB/s or 100 Mbps? > Is that Megabytes or Mebibytes? :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | druck <news@druck.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-04 20:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mpr3qb$dpl$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9296 |
On 04/08/2015 07:49, David Taylor wrote: > On 03/08/2015 22:21, druck wrote: > [] >> The fastest PC's can saturate gigabit Ethernet, just about anything can >> do 100MB/s >> >> ---druck > > Do you mean bytes or bits? 100 MB/s or 100 Mbps? > Sorry that should be bits as in 100BaseT. ---druck
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-05 08:16 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mpsd4q$956$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9317 |
On 04/08/2015 20:30, druck wrote: > On 04/08/2015 07:49, David Taylor wrote: >> On 03/08/2015 22:21, druck wrote: >> [] >>> The fastest PC's can saturate gigabit Ethernet, just about anything can >>> do 100MB/s >>> >>> ---druck >> >> Do you mean bytes or bits? 100 MB/s or 100 Mbps? >> > Sorry that should be bits as in 100BaseT. > > ---druck Thanks, Druck. As I expected! -- Cheers, David Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-02 01:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mpjoue$4f5$2@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #9265 |
On 01/08/15 21:46, Seymore4Head wrote: > What I would like to do is get a Raspberry pi 2 and hook it to either > a network connection or to a USB network card. > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA5YB2J42086 > I assume I also need a 2T external USB drive and a 32G microSD card. > > I was planning on using Teamviewer to access the PI and use FireFox > for web sharing sites. Will kind of transfer speeds can the PI > handle? I have a couple of sites that will transfer at 400KB/s. > moving data down a network is far less onerous than moving pictures on a screen > I might also try using SABnzbd. > > Is the Raspberry Pi 2 up to the task? > Almost certainly. Its a cheap way to find out I have an atom based server fully capable of saturating a 100Mbps ethernet serving files ARM is pretty close in MIPS. OK you will need to use the USB - that might be the limiting factor. I dont know -- New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in someone else's pocket.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | cl@isbd.net |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-02 09:48 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <u3219c-a5r.ln1@esprimo.zbmc.eu> |
| In reply to | #9268 |
Here are some results I have for data transfer speeds across a network with a variety of hardware. I'm afraid its in Dokuwiki internal text format but it's fairly understandable I think (an advantage of Dokuwiki):- ======Speed Tests====== These were done when I got a new 3Tb disk for backups to investigate the relative speeds of copying files across the network. All the tests were done __from__ //chris// to the named destination. The //cp// column is for copying to an nfs mount, or in the case of //chris// to a local filesystem. Similarly for the //rsync to nfs// column for destination //chris// the copy is to a local filesystem. The USB 2.0 disk was in all cases my 750Gb eSata/USB drive with ext3 filesystem except for one set of tests to raspberrypi with NTFS filesystem. ^ Destination ^ Hardware ^ Disk drive ^ Connection ^ Bandwidth ^ cp ^ rsync to nfs ^ rsync direct ^ rsync daemon ^ comments ^ | acer-aspire | Intel Atom | Internal | 100Mbs | 94 Mb/s | 11.4 MB/s | 10.8 MB/s | 11.3 Mb/s | | Limited wholly by connection speed | | ::: | ::: | ::: | WiFi | 22 Mb/s | 2.7 MB/s | 2.6 MB/s | 2.8 Mb/s | | ::: | | ::: | ::: | USB 2.0 | 100Mbs | 94 Mb/s | 11.6 MB/s | 10.4 MB/s | 11.1 Mb/s | | ::: | | ::: | ::: | ::: | WiFi | 22 Mb/s | 2.6 MB/s | 2.6 MB/s | 2.8 Mb/s | | ::: | | chris | Intel I3 | Sata II | Same drive | 3000 Mb/s | 108.1 MB/s | 63.9 MB/s | 71.4 MB/s | | | | ::: | ::: | ::: | Other drive | ::: | 357.1 MB/s | 61.0 MB/s | 121.6 MB/s | | ::: | | backup | WD My Cloud | Internal | 1000Mb/s | 346 Mb/s | 10.4 MB/s | 9.6 MB/s | 1.4 MB/s | | Mostly limited by processor speed | | ::: | ::: | USB 2.0 | ::: | ::: | 8.7 MB/s | 8.3 MB/s | 1.4 MB/s | | ::: | | beaglebone | Arm | SD Memory | 100Mb/s | 94Mb/s | 7.6 MB/s | 7.3 MB/s | 8.0 MB/s | | Mostly limited by connection speed | | ::: | ::: | USB 2.0 ext3 | ::: | ::: | 10.8 MB/s | 10.7 MB/s | 4.2 MB/s | | ::: | | D-Link NAS | Arm | Sata II | 1000Mb/s | | 37.9MB/s | 37.0 MB/s | 4.6 MB/s | 21.2MB/s | | | raspberrypi | Arm | USB 2.0 NTFS | 100Mb/s | 92 Mb/s | 2.4 MB/s | 2.5 MB/s | 1.8 MB/s | | | | ::: | ::: | USB 2.0 ext3 | ::: | ::: | 7.9 MB/s | 5.4 MB/s | 3.6 MB/s | | ::: | | revo | Intel Atom | Internal | 1000Mb/s | 911 Mb/s | 50.7 MB/s | 38.7 MB/s | 10.6 MB/s | | Processor limited but quite good | | ::: | ::: | USB 2.0 | ::: | ::: | 28.9 MB/s | 25.0 MB/s | 10.8 MB/s | | ::: | | ::: | ::: | eSata | ::: | ::: | 51.9 MB/s | 45.8 MB/s | 10.7 MB/s | | ::: | | test | Intel quad | Internal | 1000Mb/s | 850 Mb/s | 80.3 MB/s | 56.3 MB/s | 66.4 MB/s | | | | ::: | ::: | USB 2.0 †† | ::: | ::: | 84.6 MB/s | 46.5 MB/s | 44.2 MB/s | | ::: | | ::: | ::: | eSata | ::: | ::: | 79.6 MB/s | 52.8 MB/s | 69.7 MB/s | | | | vigor | Router USB | USB 2.0 | 1000Mb/s | | | | | | | †† Results for the USB 2.0 drive on the //test// machine were **very** variable, by a factor of up to 3:1 between best and worst cases, I've listed about the best speeds obtained. -- Chris Green ·
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Seymore4Head <Seymore4Head@Hotmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-02 12:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nqfsrah0pjckek23pb097m8g8d57aconbq@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #9269 |
On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 09:48:30 +0100, cl@isbd.net wrote: >Here are some results I have for data transfer speeds across a network >with a variety of hardware. I'm afraid its in Dokuwiki internal text >format but it's fairly understandable I think (an advantage of >Dokuwiki):- > > >======Speed Tests====== > >These were done when I got a new 3Tb disk for backups to investigate the relative speeds >of copying files across the network. All the tests were done __from__ //chris// to the >named destination. > >The //cp// column is for copying to an nfs mount, or in the case of //chris// to a local >filesystem. Similarly for the //rsync to nfs// column for destination //chris// the copy >is to a local filesystem. > >The USB 2.0 disk was in all cases my 750Gb eSata/USB drive with ext3 filesystem except for >one set of tests to raspberrypi with NTFS filesystem. > > >^ Destination ^ Hardware ^ Disk drive ^ Connection ^ Bandwidth ^ cp ^ rsync to nfs ^ rsync direct ^ rsync daemon ^ comments ^ >| acer-aspire | Intel Atom | Internal | 100Mbs | 94 Mb/s | 11.4 MB/s | 10.8 MB/s | 11.3 Mb/s | | Limited wholly by connection speed | >| ::: | ::: | ::: | WiFi | 22 Mb/s | 2.7 MB/s | 2.6 MB/s | 2.8 Mb/s | | ::: | >| ::: | ::: | USB 2.0 | 100Mbs | 94 Mb/s | 11.6 MB/s | 10.4 MB/s | 11.1 Mb/s | | ::: | >| ::: | ::: | ::: | WiFi | 22 Mb/s | 2.6 MB/s | 2.6 MB/s | 2.8 Mb/s | | ::: | >| chris | Intel I3 | Sata II | Same drive | 3000 Mb/s | 108.1 MB/s | 63.9 MB/s | 71.4 MB/s | | | >| ::: | ::: | ::: | Other drive | ::: | 357.1 MB/s | 61.0 MB/s | 121.6 MB/s | | ::: | >| backup | WD My Cloud | Internal | 1000Mb/s | 346 Mb/s | 10.4 MB/s | 9.6 MB/s | 1.4 MB/s | | Mostly limited by processor speed | >| ::: | ::: | USB 2.0 | ::: | ::: | 8.7 MB/s | 8.3 MB/s | 1.4 MB/s | | ::: | >| beaglebone | Arm | SD Memory | 100Mb/s | 94Mb/s | 7.6 MB/s | 7.3 MB/s | 8.0 MB/s | | Mostly limited by connection speed | >| ::: | ::: | USB 2.0 ext3 | ::: | ::: | 10.8 MB/s | 10.7 MB/s | 4.2 MB/s | | ::: | >| D-Link NAS | Arm | Sata II | 1000Mb/s | | 37.9MB/s | 37.0 MB/s | 4.6 MB/s | 21.2MB/s | | >| raspberrypi | Arm | USB 2.0 NTFS | 100Mb/s | 92 Mb/s | 2.4 MB/s | 2.5 MB/s | 1.8 MB/s | | | >| ::: | ::: | USB 2.0 ext3 | ::: | ::: | 7.9 MB/s | 5.4 MB/s | 3.6 MB/s | | ::: | >| revo | Intel Atom | Internal | 1000Mb/s | 911 Mb/s | 50.7 MB/s | 38.7 MB/s | 10.6 MB/s | | Processor limited but quite good | >| ::: | ::: | USB 2.0 | ::: | ::: | 28.9 MB/s | 25.0 MB/s | 10.8 MB/s | | ::: | >| ::: | ::: | eSata | ::: | ::: | 51.9 MB/s | 45.8 MB/s | 10.7 MB/s | | ::: | >| test | Intel quad | Internal | 1000Mb/s | 850 Mb/s | 80.3 MB/s | 56.3 MB/s | 66.4 MB/s | | | >| ::: | ::: | USB 2.0 †† | ::: | ::: | 84.6 MB/s | 46.5 MB/s | 44.2 MB/s | | ::: | >| ::: | ::: | eSata | ::: | ::: | 79.6 MB/s | 52.8 MB/s | 69.7 MB/s | | | >| vigor | Router USB | USB 2.0 | 1000Mb/s | | | | | | | > > >†† Results for the USB 2.0 drive on the //test// machine were **very** variable, by a factor of up to 3:1 between best and worst >cases, I've listed about the best speeds obtained. I assume I could use my current computer and change the download drive to a USB drive and see how the speeds would change. At times I do have 2 connections transferring at 400 K Bytes/s.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ray carter <ray@zianet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-02 18:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <d2779dF7128U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #9271 |
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 12:06:17 -0400, Seymore4Head wrote: > On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 09:48:30 +0100, cl@isbd.net wrote: > >>Here are some results I have for data transfer speeds across a network >>with a variety of hardware. I'm afraid its in Dokuwiki internal text >>format but it's fairly understandable I think (an advantage of >>Dokuwiki):- >> >> >>======Speed Tests====== >> >>These were done when I got a new 3Tb disk for backups to investigate the >>relative speeds of copying files across the network. All the tests were >>done __from__ //chris// to the named destination. >> >>The //cp// column is for copying to an nfs mount, or in the case of >>//chris// to a local filesystem. Similarly for the //rsync to nfs// >>column for destination //chris// the copy is to a local filesystem. >> >>The USB 2.0 disk was in all cases my 750Gb eSata/USB drive with ext3 >>filesystem except for one set of tests to raspberrypi with NTFS >>filesystem. >> >> >>^ Destination ^ Hardware ^ Disk drive ^ Connection ^ >>Bandwidth ^ cp ^ rsync to nfs ^ rsync direct ^ rsync daemon >>^ comments ^ | acer-aspire | Intel Atom | >> Internal | 100Mbs | 94 Mb/s | 11.4 MB/s | 10.8 >>MB/s | 11.3 Mb/s | | Limited wholly by connection >>speed | | ::: | ::: | ::: | WiFi >>| 22 Mb/s | 2.7 MB/s | 2.6 MB/s | 2.8 Mb/s | >> | ::: | | ::: | ::: >> | USB 2.0 | 100Mbs | 94 Mb/s | 11.6 MB/s | 10.4 >>MB/s | 11.1 Mb/s | | ::: >> | | ::: | ::: | ::: | WiFi | >>22 Mb/s | 2.6 MB/s | 2.6 MB/s | 2.8 Mb/s | | >>::: | | chris | Intel I3 | >>Sata II | Same drive | 3000 Mb/s | 108.1 MB/s | 63.9 MB/s >>| 71.4 MB/s | | | >>| ::: | ::: | ::: | Other drive | ::: >> | 357.1 MB/s | 61.0 MB/s | 121.6 MB/s | | ::: >> | | backup | WD My Cloud | >>Internal | 1000Mb/s | 346 Mb/s | 10.4 MB/s | 9.6 MB/s >>| 1.4 MB/s | | Mostly limited by processor speed | >>| ::: | ::: | USB 2.0 | ::: | ::: >> | 8.7 MB/s | 8.3 MB/s | 1.4 MB/s | | ::: >> | | beaglebone | Arm | SD >>Memory | 100Mb/s | 94Mb/s | 7.6 MB/s | 7.3 MB/s | >> 8.0 MB/s | | Mostly limited by connection speed | | >>::: | ::: | USB 2.0 ext3 | ::: | ::: >> | 10.8 MB/s | 10.7 MB/s | 4.2 MB/s | | ::: >> | | D-Link NAS | Arm | Sata II >> | 1000Mb/s | | 37.9MB/s | 37.0 MB/s | >>4.6 MB/s | 21.2MB/s | | | >>raspberrypi | Arm | USB 2.0 NTFS | 100Mb/s | 92 >>Mb/s | 2.4 MB/s | 2.5 MB/s | 1.8 MB/s | | >> | | ::: | ::: | USB >>2.0 ext3 | ::: | ::: | 7.9 MB/s | 5.4 MB/s | >> 3.6 MB/s | | ::: | | >>revo | Intel Atom | Internal | 1000Mb/s | 911 >>Mb/s | 50.7 MB/s | 38.7 MB/s | 10.6 MB/s | | >>Processor limited but quite good | | ::: | ::: | >>USB 2.0 | ::: | ::: | 28.9 MB/s | 25.0 MB/s >>| 10.8 MB/s | | ::: | >>| ::: | ::: | eSata | ::: | ::: >> | 51.9 MB/s | 45.8 MB/s | 10.7 MB/s | | ::: >> | | test | Intel quad | >>Internal | 1000Mb/s | 850 Mb/s | 80.3 MB/s | 56.3 MB/s >>| 66.4 MB/s | | | >>| ::: | ::: | USB 2.0 | ::: | ::: >> | 84.6 MB/s | 46.5 MB/s | 44.2 MB/s | | ::: >> | >>| ::: | ::: | eSata | ::: | ::: >> | 79.6 MB/s | 52.8 MB/s | 69.7 MB/s | | >> | | vigor | Router USB | USB >>2.0 | 1000Mb/s | | | | >> | | | >> >> >> Results for the USB 2.0 drive on the //test// machine were **very** >>variable, by a factor of up to 3:1 between best and worst cases, I've >>listed about the best speeds obtained. > > I assume I could use my current computer and change the download drive > to a USB drive and see how the speeds would change. > At times I do have 2 connections transferring at 400 K Bytes/s. The built in network connector on the PIs also runs off the USB, so you might want to try it with a USB network interface and check they're on the same controller.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.raspberry-pi
csiph-web