Same results as before (see above for system descriptions), but I’ve gotten it all down to excel / Google Sheets values so I can paste it in real quick:
| intel | htpc | amd | datacenter JBOD | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| avg | 14.85 | 0.92 | 1.49 | 0.61 |
| median | 3.97 | 0.06 | 0.27 | 0.47 |
| min | 0.22 | 0.00 | 0.03 | 0.27 |
| max | 76.4 | 83.8 | 5.6 | |
| over 30s | 10 | 42 | 0 | |
| total checks | 5896 | 1472 | 6499 | 1303 |
| percent over 30s | 0.7% | 0.6% | 0.0% |
This is with a far more limited number of plots on the htpc and AMD side; most of those drives have been migrated to the datacenter JBOD – which I’ve added as a column on the right.
This is still with two relatively full 90tb NAS’es under the “intel” column. Just to confirm @farmerfm how many over 30 seconds harvester responses do you see when running the harvester directly on the NAS?
I have bad news for the Chia team.
Even with a very sophisticated FAST JBOD setup, you will see response times over 5 seconds at times. So whoever it was on the Chia team that came up with that “if it’s over 5 seconds, you have a bad config!” rule is… kind of huffing glue? We’re dealing with hard drives here. Sometimes things are gonna happen, and 5 seconds is a pretty rough level to make a warning, and 30 seconds… basically isn’t enough time to account for hard drive variability on large farms.
I expect to see a LOT of people making a LOT of noise about the soft 5 second and hard 30 second harvester rules as these plot farms grow indefinitely.