PDA

View Full Version : Is anyone running SlimServer on a Linkstation2?



agentsmith
2005-10-30, 18:11
Is anyone running the Buffalo Linkstation with SlimServer on a real life environment, i.e. with lots of music loaded?

My geek friend helped me to install SlimServer on a Linkstation 2 with 160GB HDD, directly connected to a Fast Ethernet Port.

I had about 60GB of FLAC music loaded then. And the result was SLOWWWWWWW. Boot up takes about 5 minutes. An every Remote Click takes at least half a minute, some times up to 2 minutes.

It really seems the LS2 does not have enough RAM and/or CPU power to handle. Mine was an LS2 with a MIPS processor.

If anyone has positive experience running it, especially on a system with hundreds or thousands of songs, I would be interested in what trick you used to optimize it.

larsth
2005-10-31, 02:23
I have slimserver 6.1.1 running on a HD-HG300 with approx. 300 albums in FLAC format (28% of hard disk space used) with good performance - in particular with the SB2 remote - web interface is a bit slower, but I hardly use that anyway.

docbee
2005-10-31, 02:41
@agentsmith: the system behaves like this when it is still doing the scan for music and the build-up of the database. Are you sure that this has been completed? The web interface is giving you a notice message in the upper left area when the scan is still running.

agentsmith
2005-10-31, 03:25
@agentsmith: the system behaves like this when it is still doing the scan for music and the build-up of the database. Are you sure that this has been completed? The web interface is giving you a notice message in the upper left area when the scan is still running.

Good point, may be I should give it an hour or so to "settle down". hmm I need to find my Unix friend again to re-activate this feature.

Thanks these comments are good.

gingerneil
2005-10-31, 04:13
keep us up to date with your progress...
I have the option of a LS2 or a separate micro PC when I move house to host web, ftp and slim. I'd rather go for the LS2, but if performance is poor I will have to go the PC route..

agentsmith
2005-10-31, 05:08
keep us up to date with your progress...
I have the option of a LS2 or a separate micro PC when I move house to host web, ftp and slim. I'd rather go for the LS2, but if performance is poor I will have to go the PC route..

Sure I will, but first I need to bring it to work to my Unix friend to have him insert the simple startup script. Not even knowing I am like a fish out of water, and anything I do logged on as root could destroy the whole thing.

The Buffalo box so far has been fantastic out of the box. And apparently Unix geeks out there are having a lot of fun hacking it. And the construction quality is excellent.

Michaelwagner
2005-10-31, 06:50
keep us up to date with your progress...
I have the option of a LS2 or a separate micro PC when I move house to host web, ftp and slim. I'd rather go for the LS2, but if performance is poor I will have to go the PC route..
It may also depend on when you move house. On the software roadmap, somewhere down the line, are several planned steps which should improve performance on small footprint configurations like that.

mflint
2005-10-31, 07:30
If anyone's looking for the Linkstation HG (with gigabit ethernet and extra memory) in the UK, it's available from Insight.

(link (http://uk.insight.com/apps/productpresentation/index.php?alert=categoryresults&product_id=BUFHDHG300))

gingerneil
2005-10-31, 07:43
It may also depend on when you move house. On the software roadmap, somewhere down the line, are several planned steps which should improve performance on small footprint configurations like that.

Hmm.. interesting. What is being planned ??
If I can be sure that these things are coming, I would happily sacrifice performance in the short term for the ease and compactness of an LS2.

Michaelwagner
2005-10-31, 08:20
If I read the road map correctly, they are planning to break SLIM into multiple threads in V7. This should allow one to prioritize response, not easy now, so that a small footprint box like a slug or a buffalo linkbox could have a prayer of running responsively when working hard.

There may be other advantages as well, but those would be speculative at this point.

gingerneil
2005-10-31, 08:31
Cheers for the reply. I assumed you were talking about multi-threading but wasn't sure if there was anything else in there that would help.

agentsmith
2005-10-31, 08:51
If I read the road map correctly, they are planning to break SLIM into multiple threads in V7. This should allow one to prioritize response, not easy now, so that a small footprint box like a slug or a buffalo linkbox could have a prayer of running responsively when working hard.

There may be other advantages as well, but those would be speculative at this point.

I have a boatload of music I want to unload into a whole bunch of NAS storage space. I have thousands of CDs and it is overflowing all my shelves in my smallish Hong Kong apartment, wife is none too happy about that.

If I unload most of my CDs into a Terra Station or something like that I can the physical CDs into deep storage. With a nice DAC I can have a killer system that most other audiophile joneses can only dream of.

cuk0724
2005-10-31, 09:58
Is anyone running the Buffalo Linkstation with SlimServer on a real life environment, i.e. with lots of music loaded?

My geek friend helped me to install SlimServer on a Linkstation 2 with 160GB HDD, directly connected to a Fast Ethernet Port.

I had about 60GB of FLAC music loaded then. And the result was SLOWWWWWWW. Boot up takes about 5 minutes. An every Remote Click takes at least half a minute, some times up to 2 minutes.

It really seems the LS2 does not have enough RAM and/or CPU power to handle. Mine was an LS2 with a MIPS processor.

If anyone has positive experience running it, especially on a system with hundreds or thousands of songs, I would be interested in what trick you used to optimize it.

I have nearly 10,000 songs all MP3 on a Linkstation 2. The web interface is slow, but I don't really use that much. The responce to the remote is fine (the same as Softsqueeze on my main PC) I used to run it over a wireless network, but kept getting drop outs, so I now use Homeplug and have no problems.

One thing though, don't try to use it if it is still scanning your music as I get the same sort of responce times that you are getting

Marc D.Field
2005-10-31, 18:09
agentsmith wrote:
>If anyone has positive experience running it, especially on a system
>with hundreds or thousands of songs, I would be interested in what
>trick you used to optimize it.

Hi,

I have a PPC LinkStation with about 9000 songs, all mp3, connected via wireless
Menu performance via remote is very good. The web interface can be slow. Playback is perfect (no skipping). I'm running SlimServer 6.1.1. I haven't done anything to optimize it - just make sure you give a while for the thing to scan your music because performance during the scan is poor.

Marc