Putting on my FreeNAS cap:
1) RAIDZ1 is not recommended unless the data is not particularly important; RAIDZ1 loses redundancy in a drive loss scenario, and any URE's of pool data are unrepairable unless maybe they happen to be metadata.
2) 10Gbps with FreeNAS is a little dicey even on a well-resourced (read: MUCH larger) platform, and one needs to be very careful about defining things. It is possible to get over a Gbps out of a small setup. On the other hand, I can make a large setup crawl at a few Mbps by applying pathological traffic patterns (think, especially, random seeking of small blocks). Defining the use case is critical.
2a) Your underlying pool is incapable of 10Gbps. Today's fast drives can sustain perhaps 225MB/sec, three of those pounding out sequential data at top speeds would be 775MBytes/sec, or 0.775GBytes/sec, something shy of 10Gbps, and experience suggests that even the 775MB/sec is extremely wishful thinking.
3) To a certain extent, an environment with parallelism is beneficial in that you are more likely to be able to hit your pool's actual I/O limits. It is important to define what sort of protocol you are using to access the filer, and what sort of concurrency there might be.
I'd bet you'd see two to four Gbit/sec for ISO or other large sequential file storage as long as you kept occupancy and fragmentation down to reasonable numbers (80%/20%), tuned for large TCP buffers on both sides, and used a Chelsio T420 or T520 on the FreeNAS side, along with a well-designed machine and OS on the client side. I would be pleased to be underestimating that.
1) RAIDZ1 is not recommended unless the data is not particularly important; RAIDZ1 loses redundancy in a drive loss scenario, and any URE's of pool data are unrepairable unless maybe they happen to be metadata.
2) 10Gbps with FreeNAS is a little dicey even on a well-resourced (read: MUCH larger) platform, and one needs to be very careful about defining things. It is possible to get over a Gbps out of a small setup. On the other hand, I can make a large setup crawl at a few Mbps by applying pathological traffic patterns (think, especially, random seeking of small blocks). Defining the use case is critical.
2a) Your underlying pool is incapable of 10Gbps. Today's fast drives can sustain perhaps 225MB/sec, three of those pounding out sequential data at top speeds would be 775MBytes/sec, or 0.775GBytes/sec, something shy of 10Gbps, and experience suggests that even the 775MB/sec is extremely wishful thinking.
3) To a certain extent, an environment with parallelism is beneficial in that you are more likely to be able to hit your pool's actual I/O limits. It is important to define what sort of protocol you are using to access the filer, and what sort of concurrency there might be.
I'd bet you'd see two to four Gbit/sec for ISO or other large sequential file storage as long as you kept occupancy and fragmentation down to reasonable numbers (80%/20%), tuned for large TCP buffers on both sides, and used a Chelsio T420 or T520 on the FreeNAS side, along with a well-designed machine and OS on the client side. I would be pleased to be underestimating that.