network need some networking advise

[tarbax]

I am struggling lately to manage all my data.
i am a photographer who takes a lot of image sequence's (time-lapse) and video that takes a lot of space.
Currently i have everything on my pc and NAS (synology) for backup reasons.

But all my storage runs out quickly so i have decided to step up my game of data management.
i am planning to get a big synology NAS and get all my footage off my pc and edit directly on my NAS.
But i need a lot off bandwidth so i have decided to get some better network gear

Router: Tp-link TL-ER6120 (i have some ddos attacks lately and this was needed to fix that)

Switch: Tp-link TL-SG3424

AP: ubiquity AP AC PRO

 

now comes all off my questions because im not 100% sure off all this will work:
1. wil 4x cat6 connection with lacp be enough to get 400 MB/s read/write speeds ? (NAS should be able to give 450MB/s write and 415MB/s read)
2. will a Intel PRO/1000 PT Quad Port Adapter work with osx ?

3. will this whole setup reliable ?

4. will 4 cat6 sftp cables give interference with each-other? also there will be a power cable against it and audio cable

 

maybe any recommendations what can be better ?

 

how i wanna do it:
http://prntscr.com/f39hy6

any help is greatly appreciated!

 

thanks

[Oshino Shinobu]

15 minutes ago, tarbax said:

now comes all off my questions because im not 100% sure off all this will work:
1. wil 4x cat6 connection with lacp be enough to get 400 MB/s read/write speeds ? (NAS should be able to give 450MB/s write and 415MB/s read)
2. will a Intel PRO/1000 PT Quad Port Adapter work with osx ?

3. will this whole setup reliable ?

4. will 4 cat6 sftp cables give interference with each-other? also there will be a power cable against it and audio cable

1. That's not how Link Aggregation works. You would be able to get 4x 1Gbps transfers from LACP, but you don't get a single 4Gbps link. LACP and other Link Aggregation protocols are good for when the NAS is being hit with multiple connections at once, but it doesn't do anything for single session transfers, as you are going to be using it. 

2. It should work AFAIK. 

3. Provided there are no hardware faults and things are set up correctly, it should be pretty reliable. 

4. I'd avoid running ethernet cable alongside power cables where you can, but if you're using SFTP you'll get the best results. 

 

For what you're wanting to do, you're either going to need an entire setup and network that supports SMB3 Multichannel or you're going to need to invest in some >1Gbps networking equipment, which can be pretty pricey. Your solution as you've laid it out will not do what you want, due to LACP not functioning in a manner that does what you want. 

 

EDIT: Right now, the availability of >1Gbps networking for consumers and SOHO applications is terrible. It's either a matter of having to completely change systems to get something like SMB3 Multichannel running (when it wants to, that is) or spending a fortune on 10GbE stuff, where the NICs alone are expensive, let alone the switches. Your best options is probably going to be a direct link between your editing PC and the server via SFP+, or to look for a switch with multiple SFP+ ports alongside some regular RJ45 connections. Have a look on eBay, as you can sometimes find some old business grade SFP+ switches and NICs for pretty cheap. 

 

EDIT 2: I wouldn't bother looking at any >1Gbps networking stuff new unless you're willing to spend thousands to get this running. It's a shame 1Gbps is the realistic limit for most home networks right now. I want to make the jump to 10GbE as I don't want to deal with all of the SFP+ compatibility crap, but 10GbE is stupidly expensive. 

[tt2468]

1. No, LACP is designed to load balance many clients connecting to one server. It does not improve transfer speeds from one client to one server. If you wanted to get faster speeds, your NAS would need to support SMB multichannel. The issue is that SMB multichannel is extremely experimental on most NAS boxes, and usually cannot be enabled. If you want faster speeds, you will need 10Gb

2. Probably not. The PT models of the Intel NICs are designed for server systems like Linux and Windows server. There are no drivers on Windows Consumer, and MacOS has even less drivers, so your chances are small. Apple also tightened up the driver signing on El Capitan, so that makes your chances even smaller.

3. Probably, but it also probably wouldn't work.

4. Definitely not. A digital signal is a digital signal. It either connects or it doesn't. As long as the 1s and 0s are sent from one side and can be received on the other, interference is not a big issue. The only way I could see ethernet having interference would be from a large source of electromagnetic interference (like a solar flare or a magnetron) or if the ethernet is running alongside power cables for more than 100Ft.

 

[tarbax]

2 hours ago, Oshino Shinobu said:

1. That's not how Link Aggregation works. You would be able to get 4x 1Gbps transfers from LACP, but you don't get a single 4Gbps link. LACP and other Link Aggregation protocols are good for when the NAS is being hit with multiple connections at once, but it doesn't do anything for single session transfers, as you are going to be using it. 

2. It should work AFAIK. 

3. Provided there are no hardware faults and things are set up correctly, it should be pretty reliable. 

4. I'd avoid running ethernet cable alongside power cables where you can, but if you're using SFTP you'll get the best results. 

 

For what you're wanting to do, you're either going to need an entire setup and network that supports SMB3 Multichannel or you're going to need to invest in some >1Gbps networking equipment, which can be pretty pricey. Your solution as you've laid it out will not do what you want, due to LACP not functioning in a manner that does what you want. 

 

EDIT: Right now, the availability of >1Gbps networking for consumers and SOHO applications is terrible. It's either a matter of having to completely change systems to get something like SMB3 Multichannel running (when it wants to, that is) or spending a fortune on 10GbE stuff, where the NICs alone are expensive, let alone the switches. Your best options is probably going to be a direct link between your editing PC and the server via SFP+, or to look for a switch with multiple SFP+ ports alongside some regular RJ45 connections. Have a look on eBay, as you can sometimes find some old business grade SFP+ switches and NICs for pretty cheap. 

 

EDIT 2: I wouldn't bother looking at any >1Gbps networking stuff new unless you're willing to spend thousands to get this running. It's a shame 1Gbps is the realistic limit for most home networks right now. I want to make the jump to 10GbE as I don't want to deal with all of the SFP+ compatibility crap, but 10GbE is stupidly expensive. 

Thanks!

so what do i need to get smb3.0 working ? (on the cheap)

synology should be supporting it
 

[Oshino Shinobu]

4 minutes ago, tarbax said:

Thanks!

so what do i need to get smb3.0 working ? (on the cheap)

synology should be supporting it
 

Support for it is patchy at best and it's still very much in early development stages. You should be able to enable SMB3 in the File Services settings. It's only been around for a year or so though, with the release of SAMBA 4.4 in March last year. 

 

After that, theoretically all you should need is multiple links to the server. You don't even need to set up LACP as it should (should) work by itself, provided both the server and client support SAMBA 4.4 and SMB3

[tarbax]

2 minutes ago, Oshino Shinobu said:

Support for it is patchy at best and it's still very much in early development stages. You should be able to enable SMB3 in the File Services settings. It's only been around for a year or so though, with the release of SAMBA 4.4 in March last year. 

 

After that, theoretically all you should need is multiple links to the server. You don't even need to set up LACP as it should (should) work by itself, provided both the server and client support SAMBA 4.4 and SMB3

so i should be good ? nothing to setup just add more cables ? and the OS settings on both sides

[Oshino Shinobu]

3 minutes ago, tarbax said:

so i should be good ? nothing to setup just add more cables ? and the OS settings on both sides

Theoretically, yes. Every time I read up on it, I see so many people having issues with it across multiple platforms. You can try it, but I can't confirm whether it will work or not. 

[bcguru9384]

get a cable modem thats moca 2.0 or better with the moca 2.0 device adapter then 1 rg6 cable cand send upto 800mbps on just the moca frequencies.  now if you are able get a docsis reconfigured settings file then you may exceed the 1.5gbps with no issues.  

i would go down to local cable company and ask them to program 2 modems for you to be an in house private system(rg6 cable not connected to anything but the two modems)

they can do this but not sure what they would charge

moca=multimedia over cable alliance

[tarbax]

I have taken your advise and gone to a whole different setup.
going to put some 10gbe cards into my pc and going assemble a server together:

intel X540-AT2 card for my pc compatible with some kekts on osx

HP Mellanox card for my homemade server

 

server:

Intel Xeon E3-1225 v3 4gb ramm LSI Raid card HP Mellanox OS: xpenology 1tb boot and os hdd 6X 6TB ironwolf HDD's 256gb cache ssd   new network setup: http://prntscr.com/f3dw4x