PDA

View Full Version : ReadyNAS -- do run SS on your NAS or separtately



shadowboxer
2006-11-09, 10:34
I have been a SS user since slimp3 days. I recently bought the ReadyNAS-NV, dual SBIII bundle as I was interested in upgraded to the newest streaming hardware and I wanted a NAS system anyway. It has been up and running for 10 days.

As I now research more carefully, I am finding that the disadvantages of running SS imbedded in the ReadyNAS firmware seem far outway the advantages. I have networked pcs all over the place in my home office and so leaving a pc on all the time is a non-issue to me. I REALLY wanted to stream over the internet to work so I could listen to music during the day, but discovered yesterday that without LAME I could not due the necessary bitrate limiting to allow me to listen to my music over the broadband connections I have at work ( bad skipping, etc.) So, I will need to move SS off my NAS and onto one of my pcs to do this.

Researching seems to show it can certainly be done, but there seem to be other issues but I am going to attempt this weekend. I was just very curious what others have done in this situation and how successful they have been in running SS on PC, accessing the music from the NAS by the network.

thanks in advance for your participation in my little poll.

-dale

JJZolx
2006-11-09, 12:34
When I got my ReadyNAS 600 about 15 months ago I tried out SlimServer on the ReadyNAS - for about three hours. That's how long it took the scanning of my library to complete. The slow responsiveness of web interface was the clincher. And those are the minor issues that many people are willing to put up with - you've discovered the major ones. I switched to using the ReadyNAS for music library storage and ran SlimServer on a PC used as a dedicated server. I've been using that setup for about 15 months now, although there are disadvantages to this setup as well. Scanning times will be slower than using local disk storage on the server itself.

I installed a new 500GB drive in my SlimServer last night and I'm in the process of copying my flac library to this disc. The ReadyNAS will be relegated to backup duty exclusively. I'll keep a mirror of the music library plus assorted PC file backups on the ReadyNAS. At this point, though, it doesn't really make much sense using a pricey RAID5 NAS just for backups. I'll eventually return to a RAID5 fileserver, but it will be a PC server with more than the four drives offered by the Infrant NASs, and a lot more CPU horsepower.

When the library copying completes I'll launch a SlimServer scan and see whether it's much faster using the local disk storage.

JJZolx
2006-11-09, 18:06
When the library copying completes I'll launch a SlimServer scan and see whether it's much faster using the local disk storage.
Big difference. Doing a full clear/rescan of 1150 albums with 13,135 tracks, all Flac, the times were:

Library on ReadyNAS: 31:49
Library on local drive: 12:20

Server
- Intel P4 3.0GHz
- 2GB RAM
- Intel Gb Ethernet
- 1 x WS2000JD SATA HDD (200GB system disk)
- 1 x WD5000YS SATA HDD (500GB music storage)

ReadyNAS 600
- 4 x WD3200JD SATA HDD (320GB)
- 512MB RAM

I'm using a D-Link DGS-108 gigabit Ethernet switch with jumbo frames enabled. The ReadyNAS has none of the included applications running and all possible speed-enhancements, such as the disabling of journaling, have been set.

shadowboxer
2006-11-10, 08:27
Jim:

thanks for the data. What kind of difference did you see in menu responsiveness when using the remote on SQIII and the responsiveness of the browser interface? On the NAS, since the upgrade to 6.5, both seem much slower to me.


-dale

shadowboxer
2006-11-27, 11:29
bump!

Anyone else running SS on readyNAS?

jeffmeh
2006-11-27, 12:05
I run the SlimServer on my ReadyNAS X6 with the standard 256MB RAM. It is indeed slow for scanning and for responsiveness of the web UI. Also, I have not upgraded the firmware to use SS 6.5, because I have read posts at Infrant's site that have stated that the performance was so poor as to be virtually unusable.

I do plan on changing to run SS on a separate processor and to just use the NAS for storage. I have no immediate need to do this, but it seems inevitable to either take advantage of more current SS releases, or perhaps to use the Inguz DRC plug-ins that are somewhat CPU-intensive.

Heuer
2006-11-28, 10:19
I run SS 6.5.1 on my 1Gb RAM NV. Browser interface is impossible to use day to day and is reserved for music rescan requests. Remote navigation is not too bad but I tend to leave it on random play.

I also run SS 6.5.1 on a TS-101 and despite having 256Mb RAM performance is similar to the NV. The issue is processing power coupled with the SS bloatware now being delivered.

shadowboxer
2006-11-29, 08:41
Moved slimserver to a fast, new P4 computer, used the newest daily of 6.5.1, installed LAME, left all my music on the ReadyNAS and I AM A HAPPY CAMPER!!

I was afraid I might have issues with the server not finding the music, but I used the \\serverIPaddress\media\Music for the folder path, made sure zone alarm would let all through, corrected port forwarding to the new IP address, installed LAME, set bit rate limiting to 192, and now I can stream to winamp at work!! Works flawlessly.

Also, the reponse of the SBIIIs to the remote is now INSTANTANEOUS and the web interface is extremely fast, and now finally useable. Just did a rescan on my library and it took all of 10 minutes.

Anyway, there is no way SS is going back to the ReadyNAS. I use the web interface a lot and the extremely slow response when SS is running on the ReadyNAS in just not an option for me.

Ksie
2006-12-01, 08:30
I run SS on a Ready NAS (256 stock memory). My computer is a lap-top, and currently I have frequent need to disconnect it from the router. SoÖthis greatly increases the convenience of NAS SlimServer for me. Also, Iím mostly done with ripping my collection, so donít have a frequent need for re-scans. I should also say that Iím running 6.3.1, as there certainly have been some performance issues with 6.5 on the Infrant. At least thatís my take from the Infrant Forums.

The Web Interface is very clunky, as stated above. But, I felt it was fairly slow when I was running SS on the laptop (2.4 ghz), and have never been particularly fond of some of the design layout either. But, I donít use the Web Interface much and the SB/remote combo works beautifully. I really noticed no difference in response at the SB end after going from PC to NAS SS. Great gear!

The transition to 6.5 seems to have been a little rocky for the Infrant guys. Prior to this upgrade they had been quickly ďcatching-upĒ to new versions, and slowly-but-surely incorporating Plug-ins. I think that theyíre now caught-up on 6.5 (to be fair, it was a significant change and Iím not sure the problems were all theirs), and many Infrant users are having no problems. I am very impressed with the Infrant folks, and their level of support. I just hope that the sync-up with Slim continues through the impending Corporate changes, and into the future.

So, in summary: I use SS on the NAS. Iím very happy with how it works, although I donít really have a lot of need (or interest) for some of the functionality and performance that is admittedly lacking.

Karl

Heuer
2006-12-01, 11:27
Begs the question should there be a SS Lite for use on NAS?

shadowboxer
2006-12-04, 16:23
Begs the question should there be a SS Lite for use on NAS?

I readily agree. A smaller footprint, less cpu intensive SS made to run on the little CPU built into the ReadyNAS. That would be great. Still I think I would end up with SS on a pc.

In the meantime, I am very very happy since I moved the SS over to a fast pc. I use the web interface all day long (10-12 hr days) streaming music to my work pc and it is very brisk and now very usable. Plus, since I have FLAC installed, I can bit limit my music down to 256 kps which steams quite nicely ( most of my music is at 320 kps MP3 and it wouldn't stream over my work broadband connection)

All in all, I am still very happy with my ReadyNAS. I wanted a NAS anyway, wanted to upgrade to the SBIIIs, so the combo was still a great deal, whether I run SS on the NAS or not..

Eric Carroll
2007-01-02, 15:18
I am running SS on the ReadyNAS+.

I really think there needs to be a SS lite.

I would start with removing all the GUI generation code, and offloading it to a seperate web server, then use a command line interface to talk to the SS Lite. I think you would see a notable performance increase. But that is just my guess.

Here is my setup profile of SS & ReadyNAS to get acceptible performance:

1. Small number of music files per directory.
2. 1 GB memory upgrade
3. Installed the remote DB access package
4. Use Moose for remote playlist & play control
5. Limit plugin use (ok for me, I'm new to SS and not addicted to plugins)
6. Use SB interface
7. Avoid the SS web interface at all costs
8. Run DB rebuild only when required
9. Reset plugin timers to be much less aggrestive (e.g. weather update at 5 minutes is a killer)
10. Turned off all other streaming & file services except SS & CIFS
11. Turned off all plugins not required
12. Enabled oplocks (only needed for CIFS access)

It works for me on 2 SB3s, one softsqueeze and one Transporter!

dmross
2007-01-23, 20:56
Bump...

...and hello. New to this forum. Bought an SB3 in December and I am waiting on my ReadyNAS NV+ to arrive this week.

I am very concerned about performance, especially given that I have a collection of music made up of well over 50,000 MP3s/FLAC/WAV files and I purchased the NAS in hopes of using it as a standalone audio server running SS.

Is there any "official" statement by either company that addresses these issues? +1 on the SS lite - it sounds like that is what's needed for the ReadyNAS especially given that they sell the combo! I run SS on a PC right now and it's great but after reading all the user experiences on both forums I am fairly certain that things will not run well on the NAS. :(

takoma
2007-01-24, 21:17
Begs the question should there be a SS Lite for use on NAS?

Drives for the NAS arrive tomorrow and I'm ordering the SB3 next.

From reading here and the infrant forums, having a build that is intended for embedded use would be a very welcomed addition.

Any truth to the comment that SS 7 will be built to allow a modular, slimmer install for NAS'?

Eric Carroll
2007-01-25, 21:43
I run SS on a PC right now and it's great but after reading all the user experiences on both forums I am fairly certain that things will not run well on the NAS.

You can see from my postings on the Infrant forum I went through the same concerns.

I am currently running 2 SB3s, 1 SSQ and a Transporter off the ReadyNAS. I have 2K+ tracks in so far. It works well and I am happy. Web UI is poky, but not unusable (needs speedup). I use Moose to speed things up and I use the Slim Devices device interface way more than a PC based interface.

I was happy enough with it all to buy a Transporter... and it has totally changed how I listen to music.

See my post above on optimizations in the Infrant streaming forum.

Buy a memory upgrade.

For 50K files, be sure to use a good directory hierarchy.

One that has been tested is:

\\<NAS>\media\<Letter>\<Artist>\<Album>\<Track>

where Letter is the first letter of the Artist name. That should be very scalable. Keep the files or directory count per directory "reasonable" for some value of reasonable.

I also use the ReadyNAS for backup of all my PCs. EMC Retrospect, bundled with the ReadyNAS is just excellent.

dmross
2007-01-26, 12:17
You can see from my postings on the Infrant forum I went through the same concerns.

I am currently running 2 SB3s, 1 SSQ and a Transporter off the ReadyNAS. I have 2K+ tracks in so far. It works well and I am happy. Web UI is poky, but not unusable (needs speedup). I use Moose to speed things up and I use the Slim Devices device interface way more than a PC based interface.

I was happy enough with it all to buy a Transporter... and it has totally changed how I listen to music.

See my post above on optimizations in the Infrant streaming forum.

Buy a memory upgrade.

For 50K files, be sure to use a good directory hierarchy.

One that has been tested is:

\\<NAS>\media\<Letter>\<Artist>\<Album>\<Track>

where Letter is the first letter of the Artist name. That should be very scalable. Keep the files or directory count per directory "reasonable" for some value of reasonable.

I also use the ReadyNAS for backup of all my PCs. EMC Retrospect, bundled with the ReadyNAS is just excellent.


Thanks for the suggestions! I have been putting off organizing my music collection, perhaps it's a good time to start. ;)

My NV+ arrives today, but I probably won't be able to put everything together for a few weeks.