Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Hendrik, Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3      
4
       end
  

Internal HDD failed, Please recommend NAS unit for replac...
  
 
amacal1
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #1 · p.4 #1 · Internal HDD failed, Please recommend NAS unit for replacement


Gigabit switch and PCI card on their way.


Mar 16, 2014 at 09:57 PM
15Bit
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #2 · p.4 #2 · Internal HDD failed, Please recommend NAS unit for replacement


Your problem is one-fold only - its the ports in the router. Even if your computer network card is Gbit it will only connect at 100Mbit to a 100Mbit switch/router. Get a gigabit switch and hang it off the router and plug everything into that. Or even better, buy a decent router with a Gbit switch in it, and throw away the crap one that your provider sent.

I don't think you will need the network card. What motherboard do you have?. And i hope you mean PCIe, not PCI?



Mar 16, 2014 at 09:58 PM
amacal1
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #3 · p.4 #3 · Internal HDD failed, Please recommend NAS unit for replacement


Hey! Good catch. I didn't know that the OS would only report the switch speed. I have an Asus M2N68-VM, which I now see does have Gigabit LAN.

Edit: I'm no longer getting the network card, but I did need PCI. My only PCI-e slot is blocked by my graphics card.



Mar 16, 2014 at 10:06 PM
15Bit
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #4 · p.4 #4 · Internal HDD failed, Please recommend NAS unit for replacement


Hmm, your motherboard does actually have 2 PCI slots. I wouldn't recommend using those for Gbit networking as the PCI bus speed maxes out at a theoretical 133MB/sec, and with the various overheads you get in real use that number goes down a bit. It might be that the Gbit network is actually faster than the PCI bus it's plugged in to....


Mar 16, 2014 at 10:13 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Ho1972
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #5 · p.4 #5 · Internal HDD failed, Please recommend NAS unit for replacement


15Bit wrote:
if i was seeing 35 i would assume there was a problem somewhere.


You might assume it but it wouldn't necessarily be true, at least for me. When I tested my setup early on, I saw transfer rates ranging from 35MB/s to over 80MB/s. It just depends on the source. In my own case, the NAS exists only to be a online backup for my work and all I require is that it be competent at doing so. If I were running a media server or working with video, things would probably be different.

The OP seems to have found his choke point so things should take a turn for the better soon. I'm not sure about the PCI card though. Is the bandwidth being shared with anything else? If not, it's not likely to matter.



Mar 16, 2014 at 10:14 PM
aubsxc
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #6 · p.4 #6 · Internal HDD failed, Please recommend NAS unit for replacement


Bifurcator wrote:
Well, I suppose there's a possibility of that - I would suspect quite a small possibility but ya never know - stranger things /have/ happened.


Based on what you wrote, I suspect the possibility is very real.


So where did I go wrong?

I told you where you went wrong. But I will explain again. You said:

Whuuuut? Why would you want ZFS on Windows or OS X? It's niche is NAS. Specifically in home rolled (DIY) systems and is one of the reasons people build their own instead of going with something from Buffalo or whoever.

This statement is factually incorrect. ZFS is the file system designed to run on Sun workstations and servers, not NAS, not DIY home built servers. Some people have ported ZFS to run on home servers using Linux or Unix operating systems because of the features it provides, but it was not originally designed for this role. Huge difference.

and also,
One NEEDS to use it with Linux (preferably BSD)

BSD is not Linux, it is Unix. Again, big difference.


Let me put it to you directly then; yes or no:

Is ZFS native to either Windows or OS X?
Those are the two most "commonly used" OS's.


Has anyone claimed that ZFS is designed to run natively on OSX or Win? This is called a strawman argument.


On linux unix iris or whatever where it can be used incorporated natively and many tools exist for it is there any useful way to take advantage of it's benefits besides setting it up as a NAS (for OS X or Windows users I mean - of course)?


I don't think anyone is arguing that ZFS should be used in Mac or Win desktop machines. Do you understand that there is a world outside of Mac and Win where people use Unix workstations and servers on an everyday basis? Or that much of the planet and the internet runs on Unix servers?


I guess almost no one here uses any other OS than OS X or Windows for processing photographs but maybe you have a better purpose way of using ZFS on OS X and Windows - I'd love to hear about your unique setup!

This is how Wiki defines a strawman argument:

A straw man, also known in the UK as an Aunt Sally,[1][2] is a common type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on the misrepresentation of the original topic of argument. To be successful, a straw man argument requires that the audience be ignorant or uninformed of the original argument. The so-called typical "attacking a straw man" implies an adversarial, polemic, or combative debate, and creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and then to refute or defeat that false...Show more

Where did I say that I used photo processing tools in an OS other that OSX and Win? I was trying to point out that various statements you had made, some of which I have highlighted (again) in this post, were factually incorrect.



Mar 16, 2014 at 11:25 PM
amacal1
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #7 · p.4 #7 · Internal HDD failed, Please recommend NAS unit for replacement


Allright, my new gigabit switch is installed and I'm now seeing transfer speeds of almost 60 MB/sec. I'm super happy with the setup and my only regret is that I probably won't utilize even a fraction of the capabilities of the unit. Oh well, it's doing at least one job I want it to, and doing it very well.

Thank for all of the help, everyone.



Mar 19, 2014 at 06:28 PM
1       2       3      
4
       end




FM Forums | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3      
4
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password