How would that work? I couldn’t find it in that post.

You most likely won’t utilize these speeds in a home lab, but I understand why you want them. I do too. I settled for 2.5GBit because that was a sweet spot in terms of speed, cost and power draw. In total, I idle at about 60W for following systems:

• Lenovo M90q (i7 10700, 32GB, 3 x 1 TB SSD) running Proxmox, 15W idle
• Custom NAS (Ryzen 2400G, 16GB, 4x12TB HDD)v running Truenas (30W idle)
• Firewall (N5105, 8GB) running OPNsense (8W idle)
• FritzBox 6660 Cable, which functions as a glorified access point, 10W idle

Great setup! Be careful with the SSD though, Proxmox likes to eat those for fun with all those small but numerous writes. A used, small capacity enterprise SSD can be had for cheap.

I tried this. Put a DNS override for Google.com for one but not the other Adguard instance. Then did a DNS lookup and the answer (ip) changed randomly form the correct one to the one I used for the override. I’m assuming the same goes for the scenario with the l public DNS as well. In any case, the response delay should be similar, since the local pi hole instance has to contact the upstream DNS server anyway.

Nevermind, I am an idiot. You’re comment gave me thought and so I checked my testing procedure again. Turns out that, completly by accident, everytime I copied files to the LVM-based NAS, I used the SSD on my PC as the source. In contrast, everytime I copied to the ZFS-based NAS, I used my hard driver as the source. I did that about 10 times. Everything is fine now. THANKS!

Both machines are easily capable of reaching around 2.2Gbps. I can’t reach full 2.5Gbps speed even with Iperf. I tried some tuning but that didn’t help, so its fine for now. I used iperf3 -c xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx, nothing else.

The slowdown MUST be related to ZFS, since LVM as a storage base can reach the “full” 2.2Gbps when used as a smb share.

Its videos, pictures, music and other data as well. I’ll try playing around with compression today, see if disabeling helps at all. The CPU has 8C/16T and the container 2C/4T.

The disk is owned by to PVE host and then given to the container (not a VM) as a mount point. I could use PCIe passthrough, sure, but using a container seems to be the more efficient way.

I meant mega byte (I hope that’s correct I always mix them up). I transferred large videos files, both when the file system was zfs or lvm, yet different transfer speeds. The files were between 500mb to 1.5gb in size

I don’t think it’s the CPU as I am able to reach max speed, just not using ZFS…

Good point. I used fio with different block sizes:

fio --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 --sync=1 --rw=read --bs=4K --numjobs=1 --iodepth=1 --runtime=60 --time_based --name seq_read --filename=/dev/sda

4K = IOPS=41.7k, BW=163MiB/s (171MB/s)
8K = IOPS=31.1k, BW=243MiB/s (254MB/s)
IOPS=13.2k, BW=411MiB/s (431MB/s)
512K = IOPS=809, BW=405MiB/s (424MB/s)
1M = IOPS=454, BW=455MiB/s (477MB/s)

I’m gonna be honest though, I have no idea what to make of these values. Seemingly, the drive is capable of maxing out my network. The CPU shouldn’t be the problem, it’s a i7 10700.

Tubearchivist works well for me and integrates with jellyfin.

Tubearchivist works great for me. Downloader, database and player, all in one. Even integration with jellyfin is possible, not sure about plex though.

Ah, thank you for clearing that up, much appreciated!

Excellent, I’ll probably do that then. If I think about it, only one container needs write access so I should be good to go. User/permissions will be the same, since it’s docker and I have one user for it. Awesome!

Ah, very good to know. Then it makes sense to use this approach. Now I only need to figure out, whether I can give my NAS access drives of other VMs, as I might want to download a copy of that data easily. I guess here might be a problem with permissions and file lock, but I’m not sure. I’ll look into this option, thanks!

That makes sense, especially when the drives are equally old. Thanks for explaining it!

I’m curious. Where is the problem with small drives for RAID5? Too many writes for such a small drive?

That sounds very interesting and I’ll definetly look into it. Thank you!

It’s good to know, that it works. I will probably play around for a bit once I get my hardware. Thanks for letting me know!