2013 Mac Pro Ethernet

[ytoyoda]

A hub is not a switch and a switch is not a hub. You would use a hub or a switch.

Thank you. In Japan people use the term "Switching hub" rather than Network Switch and some people teach *Switch" is a kind of Hub. So, I thought, switch is the kind of hub.

I found the following explanation on Wikipedia.

A network switch (sometimes known as a switching hub) is a computer networking device that is used to connect many devices together on a computer network. A switch is considered more advanced than a hub because a switch will only send a message to the device that needs or requests it, rather than broadcasting the same message out of each of its ports.

Going forward, I will refer it as Switch or Network Switch. Thank you,

 

[m4v3r1ck]

I've seen conflicting reports over whether link aggregation actually allows for double the bandwidth with protocols that don't explicitly support it. Are folks actually getting more than 1000 Mbps (~125 MB/s) over aggregated gigabit ports via, say, built-in file sharing on individual file transfers?

Yes! It works like a charme.

Mac Pro 3.1 <--> managed SWITCH HP 1810-8G v2 <--> Syno NAS 1812+

Using FileZilla filetranfer.

 

[ytoyoda]

I found my QNAP NAS has several different "Port Trunking" mode. It looks like some of them work without IEEE 802.3ad compatible switch. After I receive my Mac Pro, I will try the mode which works without 802.3ad switch.

 

[m4v3r1ck]

I found my QNAP NAS has several different "Port Trunking" mode. It looks like some of them work without IEEE 802.3ad compatible switch. After I receive my Mac Pro, I will try the mode which works without 802.3ad switch.

But you need to trunk the two nMP Gbit connections into one as well. FWIK that's done by the managed switch.

 

[d-m-a-x]

I tried this, had a feeling the dual link would not work without a switch. Anyway, i used a 2 cat6 cables and transferd some big files between the new and old MP. Felt as fast as an internal spinning hard drive. I am going to raid the cMp once i get some more drives. Single link is good enough for this, i'm sure there would be a bottleneck if cMp were filled with ssd's

 

[ibgb]

Yes! It works like a charme.

Mac Pro 3.1 <--> managed SWITCH HP 1810-8G v2 <--> Syno NAS 1812+

Image

Image

Using FileZilla filetranfer.

I think you may be showing the thru put of your HP switch. Your HP 8 port gigabit ethernet switch should be capable of an aggregate 8 gigabit thru put. But that doesn't mean that you get more than 1 gigabit to your mac.

The best way to see what speed you get is with software like iozone or bonnie++. These packages are available with mac ports.

Description:          Bonnie is a disk i/o benchmarker, Bonnie64 is a slight rev of the original Bonnie, designed to run on 64-bit computers. Also the
                      output is a bit more useful since it reports in M/sec rather than K/sec
Homepage:             http://www.textuality.com/bonnie/

Fetch Dependencies:   subversion
Platforms:            darwin
License:              unknown
Maintainers:          nomaintainer@macports.org

Description:          Iozone tests the speed of I/O to actual files. Therefore, this measurement factors in the efficiency of your machine's file
                      system, operating system, C compiler, and C runtime library. It produces a measurement which is the number of bytes per second
                      that your system can read or write to a file.
Homepage:             http://www.iozone.org/

Platforms:            darwin
License:              Restrictive/Distributable GPL-2+
Maintainers:          jmr@macports.org, openmaintainer@macports.org

I would be interested in what your nas puts out. I am building my own nas.

You could build your own nas that blasted udp packets over both gig E links, then have a special mac app which put them in the right order, but it would not be standard.

 

[deconstruct60]

I wonder if someone could explain the reason(s) why there's a difference in the throughput of the 1513+ between PC only link and link aggregation. Aren't both use only 1gbps link?

http://www.synology.com/en-us/products/performance/#five_to_twelve_bay

If take the footnote there literally (emphasis added )

".. The performance figures are achieved in Synology lab by using very powerful client computers with extremely optimized network settings, and could vary on different environments. A regular office desktop/notebook may not be able to achieve this high performance figures. ..."

Then have more than one client in there test set up and only a singular 'regular' computer out in the "real world".


Can do a similar thing if want to increase bandwidth to the client when dealing with this limitation. Increase the number of servers to more than one. ( e.g., sources on one , targets on the other or different types of sources on different servers. In other words don't pile all the data into one big humongous single volume. )

 

[calaverasgrande]

I do this on my mac at work (2009 mac pro)
It does speed file transfers, but does nothing for browsing internet or anything else really.

----------

Thank you. In Japan people use the term "Switching hub" rather than Network Switch and some people teach *Switch" is a kind of Hub. So, I thought, switch is the kind of hub.

I found the following explanation on Wikipedia.


Going forward, I will refer it as Switch or Network Switch. Thank you,

to be technical a switch actually creates a path based on the Physical address of each network endpoint.
They call this layer 2.
Creating paths at the next layer up is routing by IP address, hence "Router".
(there are layer 3 switches, but that is a something else entirely)
A hub is really just a dumb wire with an amplifier in it. It doesn't know about addresses or anything. It simply repeats whatever comes in one port to all the other ports.
If you are under 18 years old you have possibly never seen a hub, only "dumb" switches.

Not trying to be a jerk, I just deal with this stuff all day long.

----------

 

[ytoyoda]

to be technical a switch actually creates a path based on the Physical address of each network endpoint.
They call this layer 2.

Thank you for your lecture.
I know what network switch does. We use technical terms slightly different in Japan.

US <---> Japan
Switch (Network Switch) <---> Switching Hub
HUB <----> Hub, or Repeater Hub
? <----> each of them is a kind of "Hub"

Anyway, I use term Switch going forward.

 

[calaverasgrande]

Thank you for your lecture.
I know what network switch does. We use technical terms slightly different in Japan.

US <---> Japan
Switch (Network Switch) <---> Switching Hub
HUB <----> Hub, or Repeater Hub
? <----> each of them is a kind of "Hub"

Anyway, I use term Switch going forward.

Like I said I wasn't trying to be a jerk.
But this terminology is important.

 

[CH12671]

Like I said I wasn't trying to be a jerk.
But this terminology is important.

It is important...but the reason you hear more and more people misuse the terms is because of exactly what you stated earlier.....if you are under the age 18 you have likely never seen a true hub. Back in the day, few could afford to put a switch in their home, so we used "cheaper" hubs. Now that most hubs have disappeared from the market place (no real need, really, since switches can be had so cheaply).....people don't understand the differences anymore.

 

[macmanss]

By any chance has anyone here tried ethernet link aggregation over multiple thunderbolt ports with Apple's thunderbolt to gigabit ethernet adapter on the new 2013 Mac Pro?

Merging with the built-in ethernet ports, this could give you 8Gbps!

Sorry to hijack