|
Synology's machines have hardware to accelerate the transcoding and so the CPU is only managing file IO everything is offloaded. Given that 1080p encoded data rates are low and ToE is not cheap the networking probably still runs through the CPU though.
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 14:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 06:30 |
|
|
MrMoo posted:Synology's machines have hardware to accelerate the transcoding and so the CPU is only managing file IO everything is offloaded. Given that 1080p encoded data rates are low and ToE is not cheap the networking probably still runs through the CPU though. Make sure its supported by Plex.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 16:55
|
|
|
Does anyone run Crashplan on a Synology DS214? Everything I've read says that it'll really bog it down as it's resource heavy, but I trust goons over some lovely blogger. I'm currently using Glacier as an offsite backup, but it's so loving slow to upload.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 17:37
|
|
|
MrMoo posted:Synology's machines have hardware to accelerate the transcoding and so the CPU is only managing file IO everything is offloaded. Given that 1080p encoded data rates are low and ToE is not cheap the networking probably still runs through the CPU though. Plex doesn't support any of the hardware acceleration features in any the Synology boxes. That being said the CPU in the 415+ is powerful enough to transcode 720p and low bitrate 1080p content in realtime. The 415play could handle high bitrate 1080p material if Plex used a version of ffmpeg that supports the evansport hardware acceleration. So far that is not the case.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 17:49
|
|
|
I'm looking for a cheap and easy RAID1 solution. What is the suggested simple plug and play/able to swap out drives box I can buy? It will be used mostly for storage backup and movie streaming.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 02:39
|
|
|
Bigass Moth posted:I'm looking for a cheap and easy RAID1 solution. What is the suggested simple plug and play/able to swap out drives box I can buy? It will be used mostly for storage backup and movie streaming. Looks like the DS215J just came out https://www.synology.com/en-global/products/DS215j
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 02:54
|
|
|
Don Lapre posted:Transcoding takes lots of power and arm CPUs in cheaper nas devices just arnt strong enough. Is transcoding needed every time a media file is played or can it be done in advance for files?
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 13:43
|
|
|
Entirely depends on the playback device on the other end. The point of transcoding is to be able to change things on the fly to play on whatever the destination device on the other end is capable of. If you want to go through your media library and re-encode everything to be a different format based on your own known needs, you can absolutely do that. But if you get a different player later on that doesn't meet that need, you're back in the same boat.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 13:57
|
|
|
refleks posted:Is transcoding needed every time a media file is played or can it be done in advance for files? If its done in advance its just renencoding. Transcoding is on the fly. If your playback software is strong enough you may be able to play files natively without transcoding.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 15:41
|
|
|
Don Lapre posted:If its done in advance its just renencoding. Transcoding is on the fly. If your playback software is strong enough you may be able to play files natively without transcoding. On a lot of the shittier streaming boxes, it's because they have hardware support for x264 or something, and the app forces it to only accept that, because otherwise you'd like like 5 FPS out of the stupid thing. Or it has really limited format support.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 17:33
|
|
|
G-Prime posted:Entirely depends on the playback device on the other end. The point of transcoding is to be able to change things on the fly to play on whatever the destination device on the other end is capable of. If you want to go through your media library and re-encode everything to be a different format based on your own known needs, you can absolutely do that. But if you get a different player later on that doesn't meet that need, you're back in the same boat. Exactly. I've found that my iOS and Plex web players play 95% of my content via direct play (so either natively or just remuxed). Transcoding only takes place when the video bitrate exceeds my available bandwidth (i.e. streaming 1080p via the internet) or with some (bad) clients like the new PS4 version which seems to require transcoding for every single file in my library because of some silly SDK limitations on Sony's side.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 10:31
|
|
|
Hi all, NAS newbie here. I'm doing a bit of research to decide on my first NAS setup if goons could help. I'm looking for a NAS box (not DIY), and reading about the security issues (eg bitcoin miner, synolocker) got me a bit hesitant. My purposes would only be: Single user, NAS for LAN devices (desktop/laptop/tablet). Remote service mostly just to load torrents while I'm out of the house. Not aiming to use cloud services/dropbox, facebook, photo syncing itunes server etc. 1. I have narrowed down to Synology - DS215j (~$250 AUD) or DS214se, Netgear RN10200 ($100), or QNAP low range ($150). Is there a reason for the higher Synology price? It seems they are have similar features, but Netgear and QNAP have better speced boxes at the budget range at a better price. 2. Security - from what I've read on Synolocker, theres no info on what the actual hole was for the malware. What would be the best way to do the limited remote access I want (to control torrents)? It seems there's the manufacturers recommended methods, which involve using their Dynamic DNS service which I assume handles port forwarding, user account and access, and whatever security is involved. I'm not keen on this as 1- I'll need to sign up and be reliant on an additional service from the manufacturer and 2 - is there speculation that this basically gave hackers a database of whateverNAS.synology.com all open to the same ports to attack? Some of the forums say the default setup methods lead to the vulnerability. eg the ports forwarded for their apps (whether by following their instructions or via automatic router configurator) were the same used for system access. I'm also considering Netgear RN10200, but the website doesn't really tell you what methods they config users remote access. Theres a ReadyNAS cloud service described as 'VPN-like' but again needs a sign-up. However, do they have a better reputation for network security than Synology? 3. VPN setup - is this the most secure method for remote access? How easy is it on premade NAS boxes? Looks straightforward on hte Synology guide. Netgear has its own 'like a VPN' service. As for weaknesses, is this down to the manufacturer's implementation of things like OpenVPN? It looks like theres not really any VPN server third party apps. In addition, looking at Synology, theres no actual way to setup an user with limited privileges just for remote access even with VPN. Is this an issue? 4. How reliable are the apps on each manufacturer's repository? (Apart from the core ones) Are they third party apps, and are they checked before being listed? Or is it like a Google Play situation with a bunch of crapware? Eg if I get transmission on the NAS app store whose compilation is it? 5. As for torrent control, is setting up RSS feeds on a torrent app a viable alternative to avoiding opening up the NAS for remote control? It'll get past the issue of manual portforwarding (and making any mistakes that compromises security), and essentially making the NAS like another computer on the network. But would ports be already open for torrents to work? Thanks for any advice! I'm late to the game with NAS and anything network related makes my head hurt.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 14:40
|
|
|
I don't think I've seen another SMB NAS vendor offer anything as compelling as what Synology do tbh. We have a pair of them at work for storing archive data and believe me, if I could get them with some kind of SLA based support I'd consider them for more serious duties.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
BoyBlunder posted:Does anyone run Crashplan on a Synology DS214? Everything I've read says that it'll really bog it down as it's resource heavy, but I trust goons over some lovely blogger. I've noticed that most online backup programs have issues with synology drives in general. Carbonite absolutely doesn't support them for example. Something with permissions or power saving or something. I'm thinking of getting a qnap, anyone have a product rec?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 11:41
|
|
|
Does anyone know exactly what all the designations on Synology means? I get drive bays and year but all the regular, J, SE, Play etc. is a little confusing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 13:09
|
|
|
j is the poo poo-tier version, Play has hardware that can transcode on the fly for DLNA clients. The numbers are the amount of drives they can take and the production year - DS212 is a two-bay model from 2012. A DS1513 is a 2013 model that can hold up to 15 disks (via two expansion units). Essentially the higher the number the better.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 13:25
|
|
|
Thanks Ants posted:j is the poo poo-tier version, Play has hardware that can transcode on the fly for DLNA clients. Like I said bays and years is the simple bit - it's quite what the "poo poo tier" is vs. a more expensive version. For example just as a basic file dump and NAS to feed a WD TV player (stuff's currently on a USB HDD connected to it) do I need care about the J version? We use the "proper" models at work for archive stuff I just don't know what their white consumer line is like.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 13:37
|
|
|
In the minimal amount of research I did I found that a previous year's standard model was roughly equivalent to the current year's j version as far as transfer speeds go. The throughput figures that Synology publish are pretty accurate, so just go with whatever you're comfortable with. If you're planning on running lots of extra apps on the thing like the various newsgroup processing things then you'll probably want one of the beefier units.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 13:47
|
|
|
I've got the DS112j, the bottom of the barrel of the poo poo-tier ones. If your expectations are "like a usb external drive but on the network", it's perfectly adequate for one, maybe occasionally two simultaneous users. The mangement interface isn't unbearably slow and you can use some of the fancier stuff, like downloading torrents or running backups to an external drive without huge performance hits. DLNA serving 720p video while also doing other file operations on the drive isn't problematic. Don't know about 1080p, haven't bothered with that so far. I can transcode 480p Youtube flv video to something my smart tv understands, but that's as much as you should expect as far as transcoding goes. If you've got your heart set on extensively using the website serving/phone app supported stuff like Photo Station, Video Station or Audio Station, maybe look at something more powerful. It's all perfectly functional but annoyingly slow. Same if you need to serve poo poo to more users simultaneously or want real transcoding of higher quality material. If it's purely for feeding the WDTV Player, a more recent j model could work. I do not have the impression Synology puts out actual garbage just to sucker you into buying the more expensive models. Even the poo poo-tier does serving files fine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 14:11
|
|
|
On a 413j i ran 2 xbmc streams, sql server, sabnzbd/sickbeard/transmission.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 15:51
|
|
|
How long did processing a 4gb download take on that?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 15:59
|
|
|
Your average linux iso wasn't fast at all, but i mean, it wasn't like hours. Maybe 10-20 minutes? More of an annoyance if i wanted the latest distro that week and it didn't download while i was at work. That was a single core unit though. The new j's are dual core i think.
Don Lapre fucked around with this message at 16:36 on Dec 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 16:32
|
|
|
Woah gently caress  Despite having 2 Synology boxes at work I've never poked too much into all the advanced stuff. So from what I can make out, I can have one of these things running Dropbox so stuff I put on it is synced automatically, and I can also have it handle usenet downloads from NZB files - and presumably it's smart enough to handle the .par files and extraction etc?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 17:26
|
|
|
My DS213 runs SABnzbd etc. The little Marvell chip inside it really struggles to keep up with my internet connection as far as downloading goes, it tops out at about 3.5MBps from an SSL provider. I'd consider an Atom based model next time around for sure.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
sellouts posted:How long did processing a 4gb download take on that? For shits and giggles I tried SAB on my old 212j. It took over an hour and choked the transfer for a ~3gb file. It also topped out at around 800kb/s transfer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
Bitch Stewie posted:So from what I can make out, I can have one of these things running Dropbox so stuff I put on it is synced automatically, and I can also have it handle usenet downloads from NZB files - and presumably it's smart enough to handle the .par files and extraction etc? Yea, you can just install SABNzbd+ on them which handles all that stuff automatically.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 18:44
|
|
|
suddenlyissoon posted:For shits and giggles I tried SAB on my old 212j. It took over an hour and choked the transfer for a ~3gb file. It also topped out at around 800kb/s transfer. Thanks for doing that. My synology is a little more beefy but was always curious.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 19:01
|
|
|
suddenlyissoon posted:For shits and giggles I tried SAB on my old 212j. It took over an hour and choked the transfer for a ~3gb file. It also topped out at around 800kb/s transfer. My DS411 had the same problem when using SAB+, but if you are willing to use NZBGet instead, it should be able to handle much faster downloads (my internet tops out at 2.2MB/s, but I'm sure it can handle more). I'd imagine any of the newer j-versions should be even better.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 14:49
|
|
|
probeh posted:My DS411 had the same problem when using SAB+, but if you are willing to use NZBGet instead, it should be able to handle much faster downloads (my internet tops out at 2.2MB/s, but I'm sure it can handle more). I'd imagine any of the newer j-versions should be even better. I got in on some crazy deal around Black Friday for a new AMD A8 mini-pc for $99. Threw another $50 worth in for 8gb of memory and now I have an awesome 24/7 download box/XBMC machine. I had already built a new NAS to replace the Synology. The 212j is sitting in a closet. Can't even get someone to buy it on craigslist because my city is filled with idiots who don't know what a NAS is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 00:24
|
|
|
suddenlyissoon posted:The 212j is sitting in a closet. Can't even get someone to buy it on craigslist because my city is filled with idiots who don't know what a NAS is. 212j goes on ebay for $100-$150 with no drives.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 00:38
|
|
|
I can speak to the utility of a lower-tier synology product for media / home usage. I have a ds213 with a pair of 3tb barracudas in it (should've gotten wd reds, I know). I also have a roku 3 attached physically to the network / my audio receiver via hdmi. I'm very happy with it, to the point that I regret not going for a 4 bay model. If I had extra money laying around, I'd grab a 415+ if those are out. Here are some things I've managed to do with it: It handily serves up to 1080p to my tv with the following caveats: it can't transcode obviously, but in my experience anything I download that's in an mp4 / mkv container will play fine. The transcoding limitation means that it can't do subtitles. If I download something that can't play, I transcode it myself with handbrake, which is great for bulk transcodes. Not a huge deal at all for me. If you have legacy copies of stuff in avi containers or older formats, you'll have to bulk transcode it, which usually ends up shrinking file sizes as well. Or just replace your legacy copies with newer rips. I run DSdownload or whatever it's called, which is a download manager type thing which can handle torrents as well as a host of other stuff. There's a companion mobile app that I'm a big fan of, because it just works. I've got things working to the point that my wife can text me "hey, can you grab [random movie / tv episode] ?" and in a matter of minutes via my phone the diskstation will be pulling down the torrent. When the torrent finishes I get an email notification on my phone, and via my phone I throw the file into the plex media folder on the diskstation, plex notices it, and my wife can play it on the tv via the roku. I think that's pretty neat. I run the third-party dropbox app, which pulls down whatever's new in the various accounts I have it configured to watch (a fairly painless install / configuration). When I / my wife take pictures / video on our phones, we can just run the dropbox app on the phone, which sends that stuff to dropbox, where it then gets pulled down to the diskstation. The thing is user-friendly to the extent that when one of the drives started to go bad (my son couldn't watch wall-e, noooooo!), and I'm overseas (military), so I told my wife where the spare drive was, she dug up the instructions on the net somewhere, and she swapped the drive out and told the thing to rebuild the array or whatever, and it was good. I've had the thing for a year and a half and that's the only issue it's had. I can't speak to data rates because I don't use it for anything intense enough to notice it being too slow. It just lives in the cabinet next to the roku, router, etc. To my 2 year old it's the "robot that plays tv shows."
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 08:53
|
|
|
Awesome, right for the new year a disk is failing, and it's a WD RE4 of all things. Little more than two years old. It's making the worst seeking noises known to man once a while, and SMART is oblivious to it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Awesome, right for the new year a disk is failing, and it's a WD RE4 of all things. Little more than two years old. It's making the worst seeking noises known to man once a while, and SMART is oblivious to it. Those are such a pain in the rear end to find if you have a bunch of disks in an array together. Are you hearing something like a click of the drive head resetting + a beep from the drive? I have two seagate drives doing that but it's really hard to pick out just which one it is in the middle of an array of 12 of the things. SMART extended tests on all drives of course show nothing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 16:27
|
|
|
I replicated the conditions for it to happen and then used a screwdriver as stethoscope. Currently waiting for the replacement drive to arrive at the shop.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
Not exactly what is mostly talked about in this thread, but is there any hard drive I should or should not get for mass storage in my desktop? It doesn't need to be particularly fast, just reliable. I'll store virtual machines I don't use very often, games I don't play very often, and whatever other stuff I'd like to keep local rather than on my NAS but don't want taking up space on my SSD. At first, I just figured I'd get another WD Red even though it's not a NAS application, but then I started looking around and I see some 4TB USB 3.0 externals for pretty cheap. I dunno. Suggestions?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
Thermopyle posted:Not exactly what is mostly talked about in this thread, but is there any hard drive I should or should not get for mass storage in my desktop? Honestly. Flip a coin. Grab whatever one has a good warranty and is cheap and keep backups.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
I've had a 1 TB WD Black for about 6 years now (bought early 2009). Still doing great. And unfortunately, it's still not half the price I bought it for  (roughly $115 then).
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 22:24
|
|
|
There is a 4tb my book from WD that I got for 150~. External tho.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 23:03
|
|
|
If these Backblaze reports are actually worth a drat, a Hitachi drive is your best bet.Thermopyle posted:At first, I just figured I'd get another WD Red even though it's not a NAS application, but then I started looking around and I see some 4TB USB 3.0 externals for pretty cheap. I dunno. Suggestions?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 06:30 |
|
|
Does anyone have any experience with Storage Spaces parity drives and the ReFS file system? I copied over 1.5 TB worth of data to a 3x6TB parity volume in Storage Spaces, formatted with ReFS, and now the data is throwing checksum errors. I disabled the integrity bit for the files it wouldn't let me copy back to an NTFS partition, and I could copy everything, but sure enough, a SHA256 hash shows that the files have changed. I can open them up and the files still function as normal, however. Their hashes are just different. I was under the impression that ReFS was supposed to protect against this sort of thing, and I'm a little nervous about committing to something ostensibly designed for long term protection of data if it's going to corrupt it. Anyone had similar experiences, or am I just stupid? EDIT: None of the drives have shown any physical abnormalities. No SMART errors, no errors in the Windows System log, nothing. NecroBob fucked around with this message at 23:52 on Jan 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 23:44
|
|