Qnap TS-101 & SS 6.5 Installation Issues & Updates

[ultra238a]

The memory can be upgraded for sure, I am just trying to find out if it has to be matching or if we can put more in.

I doubt we could socket the memory.

[jimbo_l]

Hi,

Thanks very much for the update. Like a few others I'm more concerned about the sleep issues than the lack of response via the web interface. I guess there's unlikely to be a simple fix to this though?

[ultra238a]

Jim,

The sleep issues will probably be down to the swap file being used. Extra memory will probably help this issue.

If we can find a solution to get the HDD to spin down in 6.5 with standard memory we will get it out to you guys.

[Paul_B]

Bonze,

The QNAP device was originally designed as a NAS device not a server. So just reading and writing to disks requires very little memory and 64MB should be more than enough. However, adding Slimserver to stream audio, host a SQL database and an advanced web interface puts a lot more requirements on the box.

Unlikely to be an electronic issue adding more memory although it is not socket based memory. In addition adding more memory to do more tasks may result in greater heat and the TS-101 doesn't have a fan to disipate heat.

The embedded OS may also have a memory limit, but as I know nothing about Linux I can't comment

[Jerryacg]

Bonze,

The QNAP device was originally designed as a NAS device not a server. So just reading and writing to disks requires very little memory and 64MB should be more than enough. However, adding Slimserver to stream audio, host a SQL database and an advanced web interface puts a lot more requirements on the box.

Unlikely to be an electronic issue adding more memory although it is not socket based memory. In addition adding more memory to do more tasks may result in greater heat and the TS-101 doesn't have a fan to disipate heat.

The embedded OS may also have a memory limit, but as I know nothing about Linux I can't comment

Reading between the lines, are you saying that we all own a piece of hardware that cannot cope with the latest and forthcoming issues of SS software?

[ultra238a]

Jerry

Don't jump to conclusions. Adding memory to the TS-101 can be done, the OS can handle extra memory and it shouldn't need any extra cooling.

Let me just get a couple of samples up and running and tested and then I will report back.

I don't think I have particularly let anybody down in the past and I have always provided a solution one way or another. I don't intend to start letting people down now on this product.

At the end of the day 6.3.1 works fine unless you have a Transporter. 6.5 runs fine if you don't want to use the web front end and don't want the HDD to spin down.

Lets keep it real for a couple of days!

[bonze]

Bonze,

The QNAP device was originally designed as a NAS device not a server. So just reading and writing to disks requires very little memory and 64MB should be more than enough. However, adding Slimserver to stream audio, host a SQL database and an advanced web interface puts a lot more requirements on the box.

Unlikely to be an electronic issue adding more memory although it is not socket based memory. In addition adding more memory to do more tasks may result in greater heat and the TS-101 doesn't have a fan to disipate heat.

The embedded OS may also have a memory limit, but as I know nothing about Linux I can't comment

Thanks for the explanation.
As memory is so cheap nowadays, I couldn't understand why they only fitted 64Mb. Although I suppose it would still keeps costs down for the final product

As I'm one of the 'luckier' ones with no side effects except for a slow web interface, I shall sit and wait for an answer

[Paul_B]

In response to Paul he has done a fantastic job in the very short period of time since SS 6.5 has been released. He has analysed our concerns on the "poor" performance of 6.5 hosted on TS-101 using the web interface. Paul and the guys have identified that the 64MB limit of the QNAP is the bottle neck and is also looking at solutions for us.

It would be just as easy to turn this on its head and ask the SS 6.5 developers why it requires a signifcant more amount of memory to run than 6.3.1.

At some point the QNAP will not be able to support the multitude of things that it starting to be asked to do. It was designed as a NAS device not a server. The specs of the box are there for all to see.

Personally I think Paul and PAV have and are doing an amazing job.

[RichP]

Seconded: Paul_B's comments on Paul's support for running SS on the TS-101.

An off the wall and probably impractical suggestion - would it be possible to use a USB flash drive for the TS-101's swap partition and thus let it's drive spin down? Are such devices too slow?

Cheers,

Rich

[Seineseeker]

That's right, even with more memory at some point the QNAP won't be able to handle the Slimserver. As I said earlier, technology is always out of date sooner or later.

And I second it as well, Pauls identified the problem and come up with a probable solution in the space of a weekend. Try getting that service out of Sony or Microsoft!