View Full Version : Any better NAS performance?

2008-07-29, 11:18
Hi all,
A while back I was using my SqueezeBox with slimserver installed on a Linkstation II NAS. The performance was pretty horrible though, even only using it from the Squeezebox itself.

I was wondering, have the latest 7.X versions improved anything? I read some improvements in scanning speed, but that wasn't my main problem, using it was. Or are there any other lighter music servers able to serve the SqueezeBox? If not I might give a shot at making a very light simple basic server which would make SqueezeBoxes usable with slower NASes. The famous last words "how hard can it be?" :P


2008-07-29, 11:36
I've been running slimserver/SqueezeCenter for 2+ years on a Linkstation HG (128MB RAM, 266MHz PowerPC processor), which is comparable to your LS. The performance on 7.x is pretty much the same as on 6.5.x. Scanning is a separate process (since 6.5.0), so it is possible to listen to music while it is scanning the database, which it couldn't do in 6.3.x.

In my experience, the LinkStation works fine for its critical purpose, which is streaming flacs to multiple SBs around the house. The music plays just as fast as it does on some brand new Core Duo 3GHz screamer ;o) Where the LS is slow is on (1) scanning and (2) the web ui. Scanning time doesn't bother me, because I only do it when I add music or edit tags, and I can do it in the background. The web ui is slow, so I tend to use the IR remote or the Controller. In fact, the SB Controller is a huge advantage for NAS users, because the software is custom-written for SC, (rather than being a generic http interface), and because some of the processing requirements for the interface are transferred from the NAS to the Controller.

Trying to come up with a "very light simple basic server" to feed a slim client sounds like quite a challenge, but go for it!