<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic FAS2040: Anyone with more than 80MB/s CIFS performance? in ONTAP Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/FAS2040-Anyone-with-more-than-80MB-s-CIFS-performance/m-p/31809#M7554</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Yes, CIFS is not a performance protocol by design. And it is quite possible that you get better numbers with a MS Server.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Creating a multi VIF with 4 interfaces doesn't neccessarily mean, that you automagically get 4 times the performance of a 1 gigabit interface.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Hope this helps,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Peter&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2015 23:21:18 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>peter_lehmann</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2015-09-10T23:21:18Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>FAS2040: Anyone with more than 80MB/s CIFS performance?</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/FAS2040-Anyone-with-more-than-80MB-s-CIFS-performance/m-p/31790#M7540</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have a FAS2040 filer with is only delivering a max of 80MBytes/s of CIFS throughout per controller.&amp;nbsp; I used 3 WinXP/Win7 clients simultaneously and benchmarked by using TeraCopy to read/write large files.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The maximum CIFS bandwidth this FAS2040 delivers is 80MB/s total performance per controller.&amp;nbsp; We are having Win2k3 file servers in our environment which are delivering better performance.&amp;nbsp; I've gone through the tuning docs and tried nearly recommended setting, I don't know what else I can tweak.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What is the CIFS performance I can expect from my filer?&amp;nbsp; Are there any tweaks I can try to deliver higher performance?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Filer config:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;UL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Dual controller FAS2040 with 24 x 450GB SAS disks.&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Each controller has 9D+2P+1S with single 3TB aggr0, vol0 (150GB) for OnTAP 8.0.1 7-mode, and vol1 (2.7TB) for data.&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;There is 90% free space on all volumes, and there no snapshots, no dedupe, no CIFS auditing, etc.&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;For each controller I have a single VIF with 4 x 1GigE network interfaces, in-bound and out-bound CIFS traffic is flowing across all interfaces (config attached)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Increased CIFS TCP window size and buffers (config attached)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/UL&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks for your suggestions!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2025 06:46:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/FAS2040-Anyone-with-more-than-80MB-s-CIFS-performance/m-p/31790#M7540</guid>
      <dc:creator>RAJA_SUBRAMANIAN</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-05T06:46:28Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>FAS2040: Anyone with more than 80MB/s CIFS performance?</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/FAS2040-Anyone-with-more-than-80MB-s-CIFS-performance/m-p/31795#M7544</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Try enabling smb2 via 'options cifs.smb2.enable on' on the filer CLI.&amp;nbsp; This should help on the win7 clients.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;How far away are your clients?&amp;nbsp; The window sizes might have to be increased a bit still, depending on distance and expected bandwidth.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You can only get a theoretical maximum of 128MB/s over a 1 Gbit/s link.&amp;nbsp; If your clients don't get distributed evenly among the 4 interfaces in your ifgrp, then they will share the bandwidth of a shared interface.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Normally, (and as recommended probably hundreds of times in the archives), try running 'sysstat -x 1' on the command line to see if you are pushing your disks to the maximum during operations.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Did you create the aggregate with all of the disks before you added data, or did you add data before you added the rest of the disks?&amp;nbsp; You might need to reallocate your data across all disks if the latter is true.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2011 17:29:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/FAS2040-Anyone-with-more-than-80MB-s-CIFS-performance/m-p/31795#M7544</guid>
      <dc:creator>shaunjurr</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-09-06T17:29:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>FAS2040: Anyone with more than 80MB/s CIFS performance?</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/FAS2040-Anyone-with-more-than-80MB-s-CIFS-performance/m-p/31800#M7548</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you for youre response!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE __jive_macro_name="quote" class="jive_text_macro jive_macro_quote"&gt;&lt;P&gt;shaunjurr wrote:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; Try enabling smb2 via 'options cifs.smb2.enable on' on the filer CLI.&amp;nbsp; This should help on the win7 clients.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;Most of my clients are WinXP. I tired enabling SMB2 on Win7 but I can't see any appreciable performance improvement for single or multiple clients.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE __jive_macro_name="quote" class="jive_text_macro jive_macro_quote"&gt;&lt;P&gt;How far away are your clients?&amp;nbsp; The window sizes might have to be increased a bit still, depending on distance and expected bandwidth.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;For benchmarking, I connected all Windows clients to the same core switch as the filer.&amp;nbsp; I have a Foundry/Brocade core switch which is wire speed.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE __jive_macro_name="quote" class="jive_text_macro jive_macro_quote"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Normally, (and as recommended probably hundreds of times in the archives), try running 'sysstat -x 1' on the command line to see if you are pushing your disks to the maximum during operations.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;Will try this during our maintenance window this weekend and report &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&amp;nbsp; Thanks.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE __jive_macro_name="quote" class="jive_text_macro jive_macro_quote"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Did you create the aggregate with all of the disks before you added data, or did you add data before you added the rest of the disks?&amp;nbsp; You might need to reallocate your data across all disks if the latter is true.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;Aggregates were created on an empty filer.&amp;nbsp; No disk config changes have been done post deployment.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks again for your help.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2011 11:17:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/FAS2040-Anyone-with-more-than-80MB-s-CIFS-performance/m-p/31800#M7548</guid>
      <dc:creator>RAJA_SUBRAMANIAN</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-09-09T11:17:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>FAS2040: Anyone with more than 80MB/s CIFS performance?</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/FAS2040-Anyone-with-more-than-80MB-s-CIFS-performance/m-p/31804#M7551</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;80mb is pretty much for CIFS, you'll have a hard time increasing this even more. NFS and iSCSI can hit 100-110mb/s on a single link, but I have never seen CIFS coming close to that number (even with SMB2)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-Michael&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Sep 2011 07:39:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/FAS2040-Anyone-with-more-than-80MB-s-CIFS-performance/m-p/31804#M7551</guid>
      <dc:creator>Darkstar</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-09-13T07:39:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>FAS2040: Anyone with more than 80MB/s CIFS performance?</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/FAS2040-Anyone-with-more-than-80MB-s-CIFS-performance/m-p/31809#M7554</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Yes, CIFS is not a performance protocol by design. And it is quite possible that you get better numbers with a MS Server.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Creating a multi VIF with 4 interfaces doesn't neccessarily mean, that you automagically get 4 times the performance of a 1 gigabit interface.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Hope this helps,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Peter&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2015 23:21:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/FAS2040-Anyone-with-more-than-80MB-s-CIFS-performance/m-p/31809#M7554</guid>
      <dc:creator>peter_lehmann</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-09-10T23:21:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: FAS2040: Anyone with more than 80MB/s CIFS performance?</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/FAS2040-Anyone-with-more-than-80MB-s-CIFS-performance/m-p/31814#M7556</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Well, we have FAS2020 and FAS2040. On FAS2020 never reached more than 30-40 MB/s.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;On FAS2040 yes, we were able to write 70MB/s and read 92 MB/s from it over CIFS.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 09:43:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/FAS2040-Anyone-with-more-than-80MB-s-CIFS-performance/m-p/31814#M7556</guid>
      <dc:creator>tomasz_golebiewski</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-05-17T09:43:13Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

