Show off your network speed

[honna1612]

Hello guys I think current networking is very much limited by the commonly used 1Gbit. So I watched the video:

10x Your Network Speed.. On a Budget!

 

I thought that 10GbE is still childsplay. So I googled about alternative technology and found that infiniband can also do normal IP networking.

So I bought two Infiniband adapters with 40Gbit network speed each and a 7 Meter QSFP cable. All in all less than 100 Dollars.

something like this:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/QLogic-QLE7340-Single-Port-40GBp-s-QDR-Infiniband-HCA-PCI-E-x8-w-Warranty-/182288795362?hash=item2a714246e2:g:r4YAAOSwCGVX4qUG

 

I really find the technology fascinating as normal 40GbE Adapters are VERY expensive and I never heard of infiniband before. I bought two cards and they show up with 32Gbit. File sharing speed is at about 5 Gbytes/s (not Gigabit)! I cant find anything wrong with this solution. It works, is cheap and behaves like any other NIC (because of IP over Infiniband)

So normal SMB and other network stuff works as usual.

 

So my question is if anyone here on this channel has experience with similar technology or also want faster network speed (lets put the NEED aside here)

Please share you setup and experience.

 

(This is a MHQH19B-XTR currenty used) with a dual adapter card and NIC teaming you could easily achieve 80Gbits/s.

[manikyath]

to be honest, i've considered 10Gbe, mostly because i could probably strike deals on hardware trough work, but if you're in the camp of needing a budget solution for your network, there's nothing useful you can do with that troughput anyways.

 

even the datacenter i work at honestly does not need more than 40Gbps with 4 full racks worth of drives clicking away as the storage medium, and currently we deem two 10gig fibre lines as an uplink for our "server pods" to the data storage more than plenty. (1 server pod = 48 servers by the way )

 

give me a practical scenario where you would need 5GB per second transfer speeds, and where your storage medium cannot be placed in the main system, and it's cost is not so high that having a "budget network solution" doesnt really make sense either way.

[honna1612]

14 minutes ago, manikyath said:

give me a practical scenario where you would need 5GB per second transfer speeds, and where your storage medium cannot be placed in the main system, and it's cost is not so high that having a "budget network solution" doesnt really make sense either way.

Easy: You have two pcs with a 960pro SSD installed. Since SSD is expensive and you want to use both PCs you can just put a network share to on both drives. The read speed of this SSD 3,2Gigabytes/s so it is not bottlenecked by a 10GbE and you can access all your data on both PCs

 

You work in "data storage" this is peanuts compared to servers where the data is stored in SQL on a ramdrive. There 40Gbits or faster is essential. Also companies generally dont burn money. If they need more than 10Gbit they dont spend thousands of dollars for 40Gbit if it also can be achieved with a few hundred (including switch)

 

Dont spread 640k mentality pls.

[manikyath]

2 minutes ago, honna1612 said:

Easy: You have two pcs with a 960pro SSD installed. Since SSD is expensive and you want to use both PCs you can Just put a network share to on both drives. The read speed of this SSD 3,2Gigabytes/s so it is not bottlenecked by a 10GbE and you can access all your data on both PCs

 

You work in "data storage" this is peanuts compared to servers where the data is stored in SQL on a ramdrive. There 40Gbits or faster is essential. Also companies generally dont burn money. If they need more than 10Gbit they dont spend thousands of dollars for 40Gbit if it also can be achieved with a few hundred (including switch)

i said a solution that would be cheap enough to be in a sensible range of a "budget 10Gbe" setup

 

i also said i work in a datacenter, not specificly in data storage. all i know is that if all the numbercrunching fedex europe does can survive off 40Gbe, you do not need 40Gbe .

 

also, if you can afford two computers with a 960pro, you can afford a decent network solution, instead of relying on some vague network controller and relying on a single 7 meter cable. (if you got the dough for these drives, you got the dough for 10Gbps RJ45 cards, and a cat6A cable, however impractical those things are..)

[honna1612]

5 minutes ago, manikyath said:

(if you got the dough for these drives, you got the dough for 10Gbps RJ45 cards, and a cat6A cable, however impractical those things are..)

So according to your logic:

1) Buy slower more expensive 10GbE solution because reasons...

2) ???

3) Profit

 

10GBase-T also wastes a lot of energy by forcing the signal down a few copper lanes. SFP would be the better choice here (more copper lanes and if needed fibre).

But apperently you like to waste money.

Fedex is no bank no agency and no university. It simply does not have the same need as other HPC users.

[manikyath]

Just now, honna1612 said:

So according to your logic:

1) Buy slower more expensive 10GbE solution because reasons...

2) ???

3) Profit

 

10GBase-T also wastes a lot of energy by forcing the signal down copper. SFP would be the better choice here.

But apperently you like to waste money.

Fedex is no bank no agency and no university. It simply does not have the same need as other HPC users.

i will reiterate once more what my point is:

 

in no case you need a budget solution for high capacity networking, and actually have something useful to use that bandwidth for.

 

people going this route, go this route in a way that is practical, not in a way that is cheap.

also, SFP+ cables are powerhungry as all hell, not even doing data transfer, just having 48 cables plugged into a switch makes it vent steam into your face. (the switches i wired up have a 2000 watt power supply, and based off the air coming out, they frikkin need it )

--

 

but if you insist, do please enlighten me why you know this so much better?