PDA

View Full Version : What format does a Network HD need to be to run Touch (or other Squeezebox devices)



metalbob
2009-11-05, 19:54
I am in the market for the Touch when it is released. I am in the process of ripping my entire collection to lossless and want to get a network drive ready. What format (FAT32, NTFS, etc.)does the drive need to be for the Touch to read it? I am running a Mac setup at this point, but am using an old PC to do most of my ripping.

JJZolx
2009-11-05, 21:45
I am in the market for the Touch when it is released. I am in the process of ripping my entire collection to lossless and want to get a network drive ready. What format (FAT32, NTFS, etc.)does the drive need to be for the Touch to read it? I am running a Mac setup at this point, but am using an old PC to do most of my ripping.

Do you plan on using the internal server that the Touch will run or will you run the server on another machine on your network? If the server runs on another machine, then the drive format will only need to be compatible with that machine.

But if you want to use the embedded server, Touch won't be able to utilize a network drive. It will be able to use an external USB drive, however. It must be FAT32 formatted.

metalbob
2009-11-06, 06:29
I planned on connecting the drive to my Airport Extreme router, so I'd be able to access the content from other devices. Not necessarily just the Touch.

dkagedal
2009-11-06, 09:17
I don't think the touch can read files from a network drive (and the file system used on it wouldn't matter anyway).

You either connect a drive to the USB port, or you run a squeezebox server on another machine (and let it access the files in one of many ways). The "other machine" can be your standard mac or pc, or it can be one of the small server which are capable of running the servier (some NAS systems, and are like a networked drive on steroids).

dave77
2009-11-06, 09:40
But if you want to use the embedded server, Touch won't be able to utilize a network drive. It will be able to use an external USB drive, however.

I got a different answer to that? Not confimed by Logitech though.
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70620&page=2#15

usch
2009-11-06, 11:12
While it probably can be done, I would not recommend attaching a NAS to the Touch. Besides the possible streaming issues especially with lossless audio that needs more bandwidth than MP3, remember that the database and cache will also be stored on the drive. I don't think you will get much performance out of the unit with a setup like that.

But if I recall correctly, a USB drive attached to the Touch will be available on the network, so the Touch is your NAS in this case. The USB drive would have to be FAT32 to ensure compatibility with Windows, Touch, and your Mac.

aubuti
2009-11-06, 13:26
I'm the one who said in the other thread that it's probably possible to use access music on a NAS when running TinySC, but I confess that I haven't tried it yet on my beta Touch. JohnSwenson, who knows the Touch pretty well, also indicates in this post (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=461991&highlight=sshing#post461991) that it can be done. But usch's points about accessing the SBS/TinySC database over the network having a negative impact on performance is probably the deciding factor. Touch doesn't have enough storage for the database, so it has to be on an external disk.

metalbob
2009-11-06, 17:24
My whole reasoning for using the Touch over any other Sqeezebox device - or any other device I've seen - is to avoid having to keep a computer running in order to play music.

I could use a USB-drive connected to the Touch, but I think my final tally of songs will put me over the 1TB mark (there is one 1TB that was just released), so I would need to use powered one with a larger capacity. I also wanted to keep a backup of everything, so a RAID set up seemed to be the easiest solution (although expensive).

With a direct-connected drive, I'm still not even sure how to manage the database of music on this thing. I wish it would come out already so I could get started on this!

usch
2009-11-06, 19:29
I don't think you will be very happy with a 1TB library behind a wireless LAN. At least you will need a lot of patience during a full library scan.

pfarrell
2009-11-06, 19:36
usch wrote:
> I don't think you will be very happy with a 1TB library behind a
> wireless LAN.

I think you can generalize this. A terabyte of data is huge, and will
take a long time to read, let alone write, over a IDE disk channel.
There is no way that one can do much with one over even 10baseT
ethernet, let alone WiFi.

Some things just need to be connected.

--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

aubuti
2009-11-06, 20:02
I also wanted to keep a backup of everything, so a RAID set up seemed to be the easiest solution (although expensive).
RAID is not backup. Go ahead and do a RAID setup if you like, but if you want to protect the time you spent ripping and tagging you still need a *separate* external backup, preferably kept offsite.

JJZolx
2009-11-06, 21:02
If folks really are going to be using this standalone with a USB disk attached, it should have had two USB ports to facilitate backups of the music library disk. Yeah, you can add a USB hub, but...

Ditto that what aubuti said - RAID isn't a backup plan. You should still backup to a separate disk. If you still want RAID or the ability to create very large volumes, there are plenty of direct-attached USB RAID enclosures available.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816111073

JohnSwenson
2009-11-06, 22:58
I agree, if you really want to have that big a library I think you will be much better off with an external server. They don't have to cost much or take up much room.

There are a number of people that have used the sheevaplug as a sever, it costs $99 and looks like a wallwart, it takes about 3 watts so it won't cost too much in energy. It has an ethernet port and a USB jack, you plug it into the router, switch etc and a USB drive in the USB jack and load squeezebox server. It would be a much better choice for a large library.

The raw sheevaplug has some software bugs that need fixing before you can really use it, but there is a device from a reseller called the PogoPlug that seems to have software issues worked out. (it has NAS software builtin, plug into the network, plug the drive in and connect to it over a web browser).

A good off the shelf alternative is a vortex box, it comes with squeezebox server already loaded and you can get it in either 1 or 2 TB versions (the disk comes with it). Its big claim to fame is the builtin ripper software and DVD dirve, but you don't have to use that part of it, you can just use it as a server if you already have music files. Its not as low powered as the sheevaplug, but its completely plug and play.

On the original question, yes you CAN mount a NAS over the network by setting up some linux commands and editing a file or two on the touch, but doing a full scan is going to be horrifically slow. With a NAS box running the server the scan itself doesn't have to go over the network, that can make a big difference.

John S.

JJZolx
2009-11-06, 23:09
I agree, if you really want to have that big a library I think you will be much better off with an external server.

Andy and Alan are really jamming at optimizing the speed of the scanner, so I think we may be surprised at how well it handles large libraries. I'm anxious to see the results of all the changes.

https://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=14975

usch
2009-11-07, 06:11
If folks really are going to be using this standalone with a USB disk attached, it should have had two USB ports to facilitate backups of the music library disk. Yeah, you can add a USB hub, but...

You have to get new files onto the USB drive somehow anyway. A reasonable workflow would be to rip, organize and tag on your PC, then either attach the USB drive, synchronize it, and attach it back to the Touch, or synchronize directly over the network. That way you always have two copies of your library and can even include your local copy in the normal backup plan of your PC.

Mark Miksis
2009-11-08, 02:22
There are a number of people that have used the sheevaplug as a sever, it costs $99 and looks like a wallwart, it takes about 3 watts so it won't cost too much in energy. It has an ethernet port and a USB jack, you plug it into the router, switch etc and a USB drive in the USB jack and load squeezebox server. It would be a much better choice for a large library.

The raw sheevaplug has some software bugs that need fixing before you can really use it, but there is a device from a reseller called the PogoPlug that seems to have software issues worked out. (it has NAS software builtin, plug into the network, plug the drive in and connect to it over a web browser).

I mentioned this in another thread, but the Sheeva and Pogo run different different Linux distros. The Sheeva runs Ubuntu and it's fairly trivial to run Sbs on it. Pogo, by default has no perl and if you install openpogo, it's a non-threaded perl. This won't work with Sbs.

awy
2009-11-08, 05:06
Pogo, by default has no perl and if you install openpogo, it's a non-threaded perl. This won't work with Sbs.

Which is a bit of a pity since we use a non-threaded perl for TinySC (also ARM) because it is substantially smaller, and somewhat faster. I guess we could look at providing non-threaded version of the various perl-XS libraries for the ARM build.

Mark Miksis
2009-11-08, 06:43
Which is a bit of a pity since we use a non-threaded perl for TinySC (also ARM) because it is substantially smaller, and somewhat faster. I guess we could look at providing non-threaded version of the various perl-XS libraries for the ARM build.

Well, that would be really cool. I have no idea which would be easier (rebuilding perl vs. rebuilding the XS modules). But now that I have a working Sheeva plug running Ubuntu, I probably won't attempt either any time soon. :)

andyg
2009-11-08, 09:33
On Nov 8, 2009, at 8:43 AM, Mark Miksis wrote:

>
> awy;483034 Wrote:
>> Which is a bit of a pity since we use a non-threaded perl for TinySC
>> (also ARM) because it is substantially smaller, and somewhat
>> faster. I
>> guess we could look at providing non-threaded version of the various
>> perl-XS libraries for the ARM build.
>
> Well, that would be really cool. I have no idea which would be easier
> (rebuilding perl vs. rebuilding the XS modules). But now that I
> have a
> working Sheeva plug running Ubuntu, I probably won't attempt either
> any
> time soon. :)

Yeah I could do this. I'm just a bit worried it's a slippery slope
into providing non-threaded builds for all platforms. :) It's a shame
Pogo doesn't just use standard Debian.

usch
2009-11-08, 11:32
Would non-threaded mean that it cannot run the web server?

andyg
2009-11-08, 15:03
On Nov 8, 2009, at 1:32 PM, usch wrote:

>
> Would non-threaded mean that it cannot run the web server?

No, we do not use any features of threaded Perl, non-threaded Perl
works just fine.

Mark Miksis
2009-11-08, 19:16
If a future SbS includes those non-threaded modules, I will volunteer to figure out how to build an .ipk. I think it's just a .deb in a different archive format, but I haven't looked. In any case, a plug targeted release should also remove some unneeded stuff.

dean
2009-11-08, 19:22
http://handhelds.org/moin/moin.cgi/Ipkg

and also:

http://handhelds.org/moin/moin.cgi/BuildingIpkgs


On Nov 8, 2009, at 6:16 PM, Mark Miksis wrote:

>
> If a future SbS includes those non-threaded modules, I will
> volunteer to
> figure out how to build an .ipk. I think it's just a .deb in a
> different archive format, but I haven't looked. In any case, a plug
> targeted release should also remove some unneeded stuff.
>
>
> --
> Mark Miksis
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Mark Miksis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=529
> View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71012
>
>

Mark Miksis
2009-11-08, 19:45
So deb is ar and ipk is tar.

metalbob
2009-11-08, 23:25
usch wrote:
> I don't think you will be very happy with a 1TB library behind a
> wireless LAN.

I think you can generalize this. A terabyte of data is huge, and will
take a long time to read, let alone write, over a IDE disk channel.
There is no way that one can do much with one over even 10baseT
ethernet, let alone WiFi.

Some things just need to be connected.

--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/


It will be close enough to my router to keep it hardwired. So, to keep it simple, would a network drive - not an actual server - connected to my router need to be a specific format?

JJZolx
2009-11-09, 01:11
It will be close enough to my router to keep it hardwired. So, to keep it simple, would a network drive - not an actual server - connected to my router need to be a specific format?

Again... It's not planned that Touch will support this. But a disk in a "network drive" (NAS) would be formatted with whatever file system the NAS uses. It won't matter to Squeezebox Server. And it usually wouldn't be anything that you'd worry about. You either buy the NAS with drives already installed or else you plug bare drives into it and it formats them for you.

I don't know if you caught this from the posts above, but if you have a disk drive directly attached to the Touch, it will share the drive over the network. You would copy/delete/edit files on the disk much as you would with an NAS.

metalbob
2009-11-09, 13:48
Again... It's not planned that Touch will support this. But a disk in a "network drive" (NAS) would be formatted with whatever file system the NAS uses. It won't matter to Squeezebox Server. And it usually wouldn't be anything that you'd worry about. You either buy the NAS with drives already installed or else you plug bare drives into it and it formats them for you.

I don't know if you caught this from the posts above, but if you have a disk drive directly attached to the Touch, it will share the drive over the network. You would copy/delete/edit files on the disk much as you would with an NAS.

I actually didn't catch that as it seemed to get off topic. But that might solve some of my problems.

But is an external drive connected to a router technically considered an NAS? It's not a self-powered server, it's just an external drive. That's the setup I was asking about.

Since I do not have a Squeezebox product yet, is it possible to use the server software to prep a backup hard drive for when the Touch is finally available?

JJZolx
2009-11-09, 14:06
But is an external drive connected to a router technically considered an NAS? It's not a self-powered server, it's just an external drive. That's the setup I was asking about.

For the consumer devices that we're talking about, if it's attached to the network, then yes, it's an NAS. (There are other types of disk storage device that attach to networks, but they're not targeted or priced for consumers.) Disk drives can't be attached to networks. The container that houses the drive also contains a computer with an operating system and it shares the drive over the network.


Since I do not have a Squeezebox product yet, is it possible to use the server software to prep a backup hard drive for when the Touch is finally available?

You wouldn't use Squeezebox Server to do anything to a drive. If you're talking about a USB connected drive then you would first make sure it's formatted FAT32 if it doesn't already come formatted with this file system. Your version of Windows may not be able to do this, but if not, you can use google to find free disk drive utilities that can do it. Then you just copy your files onto the drive.

metalbob
2009-11-09, 18:55
For the consumer devices that we're talking about, if it's attached to the network, then yes, it's an NAS. (There are other types of disk storage device that attach to networks, but they're not targeted or priced for consumers.) Disk drives can't be attached to networks. The container that houses the drive also contains a computer with an operating system and it shares the drive over the network.

So is a "shared drive" different from a drive being attached to a network? Sure seems like it's the same thing. That's why I was asking for clarification on what actually constitutes an NAS as there is no additional hardware built into my "shared drive." That is what I always assumed was an actual server.

http://www.apple.com/airportextreme/


You wouldn't use Squeezebox Server to do anything to a drive. If you're talking about a USB connected drive then you would first make sure it's formatted FAT32 if it doesn't already come formatted with this file system. Your version of Windows may not be able to do this, but if not, you can use google to find free disk drive utilities that can do it. Then you just copy your files onto the drive.

I am running a Mac other than for ripping, which I am using an old PC as a workhorse to do it. I can format discs with OSX's Disc Utility and not have to seek out software to do it.

MelonMonkey
2009-11-11, 08:54
first make sure it's formatted FAT32 if it doesn't already come formatted with this file system. Your version of Windows may not be able to do this

Is any recent version of Windows able to format Fat32? My XP installs aren't able to. And XP was released in 2001.

I understand that FAT32 is simple to support, but it was useless for drives 8 years ago, let alone today. If TinySC is supposed to be used with nothing but small USB flash drives I can understand. But if it's supposed to work with real hard drives, I'd really like to see support for NTFS (use a third-party driver), HFS+ and even EXT2/3.

Will the touch be able to format drives on its own? Most consumers are going to have a huge problem with this. They'll simply want to connect the drive they've already got music loaded onto (which is formatted in NTFS if they're Windows users) and plug it in.

Very big oversight if there's no plan to add additional format support in timely firmware updates.

MelonMonkey
2009-11-11, 08:56
http://www.apple.com/airportextreme/


The drive connected to your APE would be NAS to the rest of the network. Your APE will share that drive on the network via AFP/SMB. Its format doesn't matter to the other machines on the network. Likely it will be HFS+

metalbob
2009-11-13, 21:17
The drive connected to your APE would be NAS to the rest of the network. Your APE will share that drive on the network via AFP/SMB. Its format doesn't matter to the other machines on the network. Likely it will be HFS+

So would you recommend formatting a new drive to HFS+ if I am going to be running all Macs, plus the Touch? Skip FAT32 altogether?

funkstar
2009-11-14, 04:07
So would you recommend formatting a new drive to HFS+ if I am going to be running all Macs, plus the Touch? Skip FAT32 altogether?
As long asyou are sharing the drive with the APE then yes, that would make sense.

The drive will not be readable if you plugged it directly into the Touch though. This shouldn't be problem for you I don't think.

This has cropped up in a NTFS thread, see here:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=485085#post485085

bluegaspode
2009-11-14, 06:00
On Nov 8, 2009, at 8:43 AM, Mark Miksis wrote:
[color=blue]

Yeah I could do this. I'm just a bit worried it's a slippery slope
into providing non-threaded builds for all platforms. :) It's a shame
Pogo doesn't just use standard Debian.

I guess a non-threaded perl arm build could make all buffalo linkstation users very happy :)
Give me a PM when you have one available I might go on and test it !

MelonMonkey
2009-11-14, 13:25
So would you recommend formatting a new drive to HFS+ if I am going to be running all Macs, plus the Touch? Skip FAT32 altogether?

What funkstar said, yes. As long as you don't plan to connect that drive in a standard USB enclosure, directly to the SBTouch. Going through Airport Extreme (or TIme Capsule for that mater) will be fine. So will sharing the drive from one of your Macs or running SqueezeBox Server on one of your Macs accessing the drive on APE, TC or directly connected.

FAT32 performance under Mac OS is also terrible, not to mention it doesn't support all the file attributes used by Mac OS.