Hardwired LAN slow on 10.10.1 - not usable

Question

Level 1

28 points

Hardwired LAN slow on 10.10.1 - not usable

Immediately upon upgrading to 10.10.1 I noticed my Hardwired LAN (cat5e) performance took a huge performance hit, so much it's not usable.

I've not seen reports of this, and under 10.10 base I had no problems with LAN speed.

I have multiple Aperture Libraries, these are "big" in size 30GB to close to 300GB.

I have a 6TB NAS (WD MyCloud EX2) and a 2TB via USB on the Airport Extreme. Both used to work no problem but now so slow

What took 3-4 hours to copy a 250GB file is now days....not acceptable, I even started the copy overnight and next morning still chugging away, pictures show what I mean

When I take that exact same 2TB drive, un-plug it from the Airport Extreme and directly plug it to the iMac it transfers files as expected, 3-4 hours for 250GB file.

snapshots shows the transfer speed progression from initial start to a few minute after

Help me ..

I can't use my NAS like this, and it worked perfect on 10.9.x

iMac (27-inch Late 2009), OS X Yosemite (10.10), Mac user since 1984 (college...)

Posted on Nov 23, 2014 4:37 AM

Reply

Answer 1

mtbdudex Author

Level 1

28 points

Nov 24, 2014 4:51 AM in response to mtbdudex

I have opened up a support case in the WD formal support page.

I will post here updates on that side, I'm looking to see is this a WD issue or a Apple issue.....

Reply

Answer 2

mtbdudex Author

Level 1

28 points

Nov 24, 2014 2:19 PM in response to mtbdudex

Hi;

I was on the phone with WD customer support just now for about 25 mintues.

We did the following:

a) confirmed I am on the latest firmware - 1.05.21

b) did a reset in the back with a paper clip; tried copying files took as long

c) did a System restore under settings>utilities>system restore; tried copying files took as long

We then tried a few things:

a) 50MB single file , almost immediately copy

b) a iDVD file 5GB in size, this took approx 2 minutes

c) a Aperture file 5GB in size, this has 789 photos and video clips inside it.....the copy process started then got "stuck" around 24.7MB, the time went to 2 hours to copy, then 3 hours to copy, while not going past 24.7MB, then 4 hours to copy...we stopped it after it went to 6 hours to copy at 25 MB of 5.19 GB

d) tried my iTunes library, which is 72.51GB with 10,584 items (in iTunes it shows 5, 318 songs 30.25GB + a few podcasts and 5 home made DVD's done in iDVD, 99.5% is songs + artwork of course). It started the copy process almost immediately at 8 hours 70MB of 72.5GB for 10, 233 items, I could see the items count going down at the copy progressed. It then settled on about 9 hours when I stopped it at copying 9, 510 items (351 MB of 72.5GB)

So, it's not strictly the file size but seems the accounting of so many individual files during the copy/move process....at least that's my guess.

He was going to Level 2 support and get back with me later.

I'll keep updating here for fact based data.

Reply

Answer 3

mtbdudex Author

Level 1

28 points

Nov 24, 2014 2:21 PM in response to mtbdudex

oops - duplicate post ignore this one

Reply

Answer 4

mtbdudex Author

Level 1

28 points

Nov 25, 2014 8:33 AM in response to mtbdudex

As more data points I took a single 2.1GB file (a iDVD file) and both uploaded it to the EX2 NAS and downloaded it from the EX2 NAS

Some image to share:

Upload from iMac to EX2 NAS

Download from EX2 NAS to iMac is quite fast

Device activity screen for that single 2.1GB upload/download file

Later I will duplicate the 5GB Aperture file to see the network performance graph for that, though I will probably have to cancel it because once it goes to hours gfor a 5GB file that kills using the iMac for other purposes

Reply

Answer 5

Feb 20, 2015 1:35 AM in response to mtbdudex

I have the same issue with my new iMac 27" 5k retina. Very slow wired. When i change to wifi only, I get max speed from internet. When i change network hardware to 100baseT, i get around 95mbit speed. Change it back to 1000baseT, it's back to very slow speeds.

Any news on this issue?

Reply