• SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    4 days ago

    About damn time. We got a boost every few years from 10 to 100 to 1000. Then we just… Stopped. Stagnated. It’s understandable why, for a good long time one gigabit was all anybody needed, 100 MByte/sec is pretty good even for a NAS.

    Of course then fiber ISPs got in the game, now in a lot of places you can buy 7-8gbps as a consumer product. And even multi-gig, which was supposed to ‘fix’ this, really ended up being insufficient. You could make a salad argument that multi gig was a waste of time and we should have just started moving to 10 gig.

    Unfortunately, 10 gig switches still carry a significant premium. But this will start to shake that up. Sooner the better.

    • ftbd@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      3 days ago

      100MB/s are frustrating for a NAS. SSDs have been common for a decade, and the old spinning rust storage in my NAS is still faster than the network can handle?

        • SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          100 MByte/sec. 8 bits per byte, call it 10 when you include overhead / CRC / etc.
          1000 mbit = 100 mbyte

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            19 hours ago

            Sure. My point was that even for 100mbit/s, even UHD could probably still be streamed.

            HDDs can probably max a 1gbit/s connection as well (often get 150MB/s sequential), which is more than sufficient for multiple IHD streams. Moving to 10gbit/s really isn’t needed for anything, and SSDs aren’t needed either to max a gbit/s network, unless doing random reads (i.e. lots of small files).