PDA

View Full Version : Lacie NAS



Dondi Fusco
2004-10-01, 09:04
I had SlimServer running on my Lacie EtherNet Disk....
and I hit the RAM limitations. I put the server
software back on another client, while the music is
still located on the NAS (~70,000 files). The Lacie
NAS works, but not for larger libraries. If there's a
way to up the RAM, I'd be very interested in knowing.

-- D


--- Nic Wardle <nic (AT) nwardle (DOT) freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

> Hi
> I seem to be full of questions today!! sorry...
> Was looking at the Lacie Ethernet Disk (mentioned on
> Slim web site partners). This looks good to me (have
> been following thread about the Buffalo Linkstation
> with interest also). One question though, do you
> think the on board 128Mb of memory will be enough to
> cope with an ever expanding collection of music? Do
> you think the 700 + Mhz processor wil be able to
> cope with streaming FLAC or other uncompressed
> stuff?
> It looks very tempting....!
>
> Nic
>
> --
>
> Whatever you Wanadoo:
> http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/time/
>
> This email has been checked for most known viruses -
> find out more at:
> http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/help/id/7098.htm
>

Jason Rimmer
2004-10-01, 09:08
Will the database backend remove the need to scale memory with size of
music collection? If now, what's chewing up the memory?

Dondi Fusco wrote:
> I had SlimServer running on my Lacie EtherNet Disk....
> and I hit the RAM limitations. I put the server
> software back on another client, while the music is
> still located on the NAS (~70,000 files). The Lacie
> NAS works, but not for larger libraries. If there's a
> way to up the RAM, I'd be very interested in knowing.
>
> -- D

--
Jason Rimmer
jrimmer at irth dot net

kdf
2004-10-01, 09:19
Quoting Jason Rimmer <jrimmer (AT) irth (DOT) net>:

> Will the database backend remove the need to scale memory with size of
> music collection? If now, what's chewing up the memory?

it all depends on how much is needed held in memory to keep the server moving
fast. otherwise, the DB would reside on the hard drive and load queries to
memory. if you want to know what is taking up all the space now, turn on
d_info debugging, run wipe cache and check that log. ALL that info is what is
being kept in memory, plus the playlists, shuffled list, genre cache, sort
caches, etc.

I doubt 128M will ever be "plenty of memory" for a collection as large as the
Lacie can hold.

-kdf

Bruce Hartley
2004-10-01, 09:58
that's a shame, I was thinking of getting one myself.

Guess I'll just have to build an old PC into a music server.

Guess Linux would be the way forward??

"kdf" <slim-mail (AT) deane-freeman (DOT) com> wrote in
message news:1096647591.415d83a7409d9 (AT) callisto (DOT) deane-freeman.com...
> Quoting Jason Rimmer <jrimmer (AT) irth (DOT) net>:
>
>> Will the database backend remove the need to scale memory with size of
>> music collection? If now, what's chewing up the memory?
>
> it all depends on how much is needed held in memory to keep the server
> moving
> fast. otherwise, the DB would reside on the hard drive and load queries
> to
> memory. if you want to know what is taking up all the space now, turn on
> d_info debugging, run wipe cache and check that log. ALL that info is
> what is
> being kept in memory, plus the playlists, shuffled list, genre cache, sort
> caches, etc.
>
> I doubt 128M will ever be "plenty of memory" for a collection as large as
> the
> Lacie can hold.
>
> -kdf

kdf
2004-10-01, 10:21
Quoting Bruce Hartley <Bruce (AT) Seahunt4pl (DOT) co.uk>:

> that's a shame, I was thinking of getting one myself.

128 might work....just wont be "plenty".

> Guess I'll just have to build an old PC into a music server.

> Guess Linux would be the way forward??

in my experience, that's the biggest bang for the buck. However, I've never
tried OSX. Teh big think linux has going for it is that you can strip it down
to minimal. without a gui, the memory is free up for slimserver to use.

-kdf

> "kdf" <slim-mail (AT) deane-freeman (DOT) com> wrote in
> message news:1096647591.415d83a7409d9 (AT) callisto (DOT) deane-freeman.com...
> > Quoting Jason Rimmer <jrimmer (AT) irth (DOT) net>:
> >
> >> Will the database backend remove the need to scale memory with size of
> >> music collection? If now, what's chewing up the memory?
> >
> > it all depends on how much is needed held in memory to keep the server
> > moving
> > fast. otherwise, the DB would reside on the hard drive and load queries
> > to
> > memory. if you want to know what is taking up all the space now, turn on
> > d_info debugging, run wipe cache and check that log. ALL that info is
> > what is
> > being kept in memory, plus the playlists, shuffled list, genre cache, sort
> > caches, etc.
> >
> > I doubt 128M will ever be "plenty of memory" for a collection as large as
> > the
> > Lacie can hold.
> >
> > -kdf
>
>
>
>