AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Networking, Media Servers & Content Streaming › Synology DS1511+ first look (mini review)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Synology DS1511+ first look (mini review) - Page 3

post #61 of 460
2/13/11 at 12:42pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluewhale1 View Post

Want to be able to download and upload files thru internet

If you set up the DS1511+ with a static address then it has a feature that walks you through setting this up and does all the hard stuff for you, including getting set up for dynamic DNS, setting up port forwarding on your router, etc.

That's probably what I would recommend since by your own admission you have very limited network experience.

If you are interested in setting it up manually I can walk you through doing that. Mine is set up so that I can access the console from anywhere on the internet as well as doing the upload/download file thing also from anywhere.

One thing you will need to do though if you want to do this is set up a dynamic DNS account so that you can get over the internet regardless of what IP your internet service provider sets up for you.
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #62 of 460
2/13/11 at 12:53pm
is there any way for me to map my 1511 share on my win7 machine with read/write privileges, but no delete?
Reply
Reply
post #63 of 460
2/13/11 at 2:00pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lush78 View Post

is there any way for me to map my 1511 share on my win7 machine with read/write privileges, but no delete?

I don't know if that is possible with the built in tools for building user permissions. The box fully supports active directory integration though so perhaps it can be done if you have an AD domain controller.
Reply
Reply
post #64 of 460
2/13/11 at 3:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcfay View Post

. . . I'll probably just drag over the folders through Win7 once they're all networked together.

Hi jcfay,

Though that may work, it will be a lot slower than going NAS-to-NAS. Win7 will read the data across the network into buffers within itself, and then write across the network to the other NAS.

If you use the Synology File-Manager, it should get the job done in half the time.
Reply
Reply
post #65 of 460
2/13/11 at 3:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marde View Post

. . . how well does the 1511 act as a DLNA host to media player clients?

^^ They do not include DLNA ^^ Should DLNA be listed there?

Hi Marde,

My Synology CubeStation said "uPnP" right on the box. When it did not work, I called tech-support. After they had me perform a few tests to confirm it did not work, I received the following response.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Synology Tech-Support View Post

Hello Mark,

Thank you for your testing.

I am sorry to hear that your device is not working with the server as you would like.

Our products have not been touted as UPnP certified. We support some UPnP devices, but have not yet achieved full certification. We have a list on our site of DMA devices with which we have shown compatibility. You can find the list here.

I hope this clears things up.

Kind regards,
Joshua

Synology America Corp.
www.synology.com

I think they are playing it safe. They are no longer claiming full uPnP or DLNA support, but it may work with your device. Did you check that page that they linked to above?

That link is still good. At the time I checked, the Buffalo LinkTheater was the only media-player in the list. Now there are quiet a few more.

As far as the ISO file support, you're right, it is not part of DLNA. I do play full ISOs through CICS, so maybe that is what they mean.
Reply
Reply
post #66 of 460
2/14/11 at 12:05am
Hey jmpage2. I actually got it to work. I set the account up. My router isnt listed as one of the routers the Ez internet can set up the port forwards on the router. I wen into the router and set up the ds1511 as a dmz(wide open access) and got it to work. I have to figure out which specific ports i need to forward.
Reply
Reply
post #67 of 460
2/14/11 at 1:45am
Got it to work I figured out which port to forward and can now get in the the internet. I love this thing. Now next step is to use yadis and index the movies. jmpage2 what are you using to index you movies?
Reply
Reply
post #68 of 460
2/14/11 at 7:50am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluewhale1 View Post

Hey jmpage2. I actually got it to work. I set the account up. My router isnt listed as one of the routers the Ez internet can set up the port forwards on the router. I wen into the router and set up the ds1511 as a dmz(wide open access) and got it to work. I have to figure out which specific ports i need to forward.

Just make sure you don't leave the 1511 in the DMZ as obviously anyone on the internet can try to access it.

To have remote access to upload and download files, all you need to do is go into the control panel for the DSM, go into the section at the bottom right labeled "file station" and check the box to enable file station and give it a specific port. I strongly recommend using HTTPS and NOT HTTP for this so that it will be somewhat secure.

Then just forward that particular port on your router to the IP of the DSM and you are good to go.
Reply
Reply
post #69 of 460
2/15/11 at 3:33pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkHotchkiss View Post

Hi Marde,

My Synology CubeStation said "uPnP" right on the box. When it did not work, I called tech-support. After they had me perform a few tests to confirm it did not work, I received the following response.



I think they are playing it safe. They are no longer claiming full uPnP or DLNA support, but it may work with your device. Did you check that page that they linked to above?

That link is still good. At the time I checked, the Buffalo LinkTheater was the only media-player in the list. Now there are quiet a few more.

As far as the ISO file support, you're right, it is not part of DLNA. I do play full ISOs through CICS, so maybe that is what they mean.

Hi Mark,
Thanks for your reply. Your experience and the e-mail reply were sad to hear. Yes, as I am learning, it is difficult for anyone to claim UPnP/DLNA “certified or supported” because the protocol is kind of a moving target. There are basic DLNA specs that must be operational (to be certified), but many other DLNA functions may or may not work that should or could with any given client or host, but may work fine on another client or host. This is why I was asking any 1511+ users about their experience with DLNA.

Synology’s web page (your posted link) is a little vague too, even the page is titled; “What digital media devices do Synology Product support?” They are not clearly identifying functions, formats supported, DLNA and/or network share (i.e., CIFS).

The “user reported supported media players page” can also be hard to nail down. Good info, but not what I was hoping for. I am looking for today’s users of the 1511+ and how DLNA is working for them. I just found out that my ReadyNAS NV+ fails to playback BR m2ts movies with VC-1 CODEC (only if DLNA, network shares work OK), I am window shopping for a new NAS and would love to hear good or bad reports about anything similar on the 1511.
Reply
Reply
post #70 of 460
2/15/11 at 3:39pm
Thread Starter 
I don't use any DLNA devices for movie playback and have always found the experience to be far more miss than hit.
Reply
Reply
post #71 of 460
2/15/11 at 6:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmpage2 View Post

I don't use any DLNA devices for movie playback and have always found the experience to be far more miss than hit.

+1 on that. Well, my 1511 & 510 arrived today and I'm creating a 4x2TB volume at present. I'm about 6 hours in and half done (ouch!). After a share's created, I'll copy over my files from my 411j (using the file manager, as suggested - thanks for the suggestion - I think I'll do a test and see what the difference in transfer speed is too just out of curiousity...), and then drop those 4x2TB drives from the 411 into the 510.

I chose hybrid RAID. No real reason too (since there's no difference between it and RAID5 with the 8x2TB drives), but if I do get 3TB drives in the future it should allows easier volume expansion.

Question: after I've transferred over my data from the 411, I'm planning on pulling those 4x2TB drives and installing them in the 510. Then, I'll attempt to expand my volume (I don't want to retain the data on these drives, I just want them as new, empty space to be integrated into the volume). Unfortunately, Synology's web site is a wee bit sparse on detailed directions regarding maneuvers like this. Will they get automatically reformatted when I attempt to integrate them into the expanding RAID volume? I sure hope so... Also, I wonder how long it will take to integrate another 8TB into a volume that is already 8TB managed with hybrid RAID? Any ideas?

They are nice machines, though. Surprisingly tiny, actually. And they stack well.
Reply
Reply
post #72 of 460
2/15/11 at 6:59pm
Thread Starter 
Each disk that you add to the volume will take something like 24 hours. Yes, that's not an exaggeration. The reason for this is that it must literally re-stripe the entire volume across the new drive. I believe you will have to do this with each drive, but they have made such improvements in this area I might be mistaken.

You should not need to re-format the drives, as long as you tell it that you want to add it to the existing volume.

I would love to hear the results of this. I added one drive to my original array as an experiment and although it was taking forever, it went flawlessly.
Reply
Reply
post #73 of 460
2/16/11 at 4:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmpage2 View Post

Each disk that you add to the volume will take something like 24 hours. Yes, that's not an exaggeration. The reason for this is that it must literally re-stripe the entire volume across the new drive. I believe you will have to do this with each drive, but they have made such improvements in this area I might be mistaken.

You should not need to re-format the drives, as long as you tell it that you want to add it to the existing volume.

I would love to hear the results of this. I added one drive to my original array as an experiment and although it was taking forever, it went flawlessly.

I'm hoping since I'm adding all 4 at once it will only need to re-stripe the array a single time (that makes sense, right?). First, I'll transfer the data, and then report back, hopefully later today
Reply
Reply
post #74 of 460
2/16/11 at 1:28pm
It took me nearly 70 hours to create my raid6 volume across 15 3tb wd hdds... and about 10 days to transfer my 20tb movie collection... had a couple of issues come up during the transfer...
Reply
Reply
post #75 of 460
2/16/11 at 3:15pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lush78 View Post

It took me nearly 70 hours to create my raid6 volume across 15 3tb wd hdds... and about 10 days to transfer my 20tb movie collection... had a couple of issues come up during the transfer...

Run into any interesting Synology bugs that the group should know about?
Reply
Reply
post #76 of 460
2/16/11 at 3:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkHotchkiss View Post

Hi jcfay,

Though that may work, it will be a lot slower than going NAS-to-NAS. Win7 will read the data across the network into buffers within itself, and then write across the network to the other NAS.

If you use the Synology File-Manager, it should get the job done in half the time.

So I'm transferring data, and surprisingly it was SLOWER using the Synology file manager. Go figure! Since I"m running from a 411j my speeds won't be super high, but I was getting about 40MB/s working in file manager and 60+MB/s using good ole win7 copy and paste. I know in the past there have been some situations where the file manager was faster, but I've been pleasantly surprised just working with win7 transfers recently. I'm routinely clocking 90-100+ MB/s to my QNAP TS859Pro+, and I expect I'll get the same with the 1511.

Perhaps it's cause I've mapped the network drives? Who knows....
Reply
Reply
post #77 of 460
2/16/11 at 4:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmpage2 View Post

Run into any interesting Synology bugs that the group should know about?

nope... synology was solid... only issues were with synctoy...
Reply
Reply
post #78 of 460
2/18/11 at 12:41pm
So I added my 4 used 2TB drives to the 510 unit, and I've been integrating them into the volume for 30 hours now - and it's at 45%! So I'm thinking it will probably end up being the 70 hours or so mentioned above, for a complete volume creation. Since I only have 8 of the 10 bays filled, I was thinking of adding a couple more drives to the volume, but knowing how long it takes to integrate new drives makes me hesitant. I'll probably hold off for a while...
Reply
Reply
post #79 of 460
2/18/11 at 12:52pm
FYI activating write cache will speed things up when formating/building volumes. With it off, it takes for ever...
Reply
Reply
post #80 of 460
2/18/11 at 1:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bozzeta View Post

FYI activating write cache will speed things up when formating/building volumes. With it off, it takes for ever...

It's been enabled, too!! I wonder if some of the extra time might be due to using hybrid RAID. I could've used RAID5 (since they're all 2TB discs), but figured in the future I might start to integrate 3TB discs into the array and as such thought that hybrid might be a better choice. Maybe I should've gone with RAID5, though. I'm not sure if you can upgrade from RAID5 to hybrid, however...
Reply
Reply
post #81 of 460
2/18/11 at 1:02pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcfay View Post

It's been enabled, too!! I wonder if some of the extra time might be due to using hybrid RAID. I could've used RAID5 (since they're all 2TB discs), but figured in the future I might start to integrate 3TB discs into the array and as such thought that hybrid might be a better choice. Maybe I should've gone with RAID5, though. I'm not sure if you can upgrade from RAID5 to hybrid, however...

Nope.

Also, If write cache speeds things up why is it not enabled by default?
Reply
Reply
post #82 of 460
2/18/11 at 1:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmpage2 View Post

Nope.

Also, If write cache speeds things up why is it not enabled by default?

Mine was enabled by default, actually, on the 1511. Your's wasn't?
Reply
Reply
post #83 of 460
2/18/11 at 1:06pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcfay View Post

Mine was enabled by default, actually, on the 1511. Your's wasn't?

I don't even know where to check it.

I know that when I went to add a 2TB disk to an existing 8TB volume, it was estimating out to something like 48 hrs to get done with it.

I think it's just dirt slow, remember that while it is rebuilding all of this it still is active and able to handle read/write of files.
Reply
Reply
post #84 of 460
2/18/11 at 1:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmpage2 View Post

Also, If write cache speeds things up why is it not enabled by default?

Because it is not always considered safe.

If the power goes down before the cache is flushed, you loose that data. With the write-cache disabled, the host gets a confirmation that the data was written to disk. With write-cache enabled, the confirmation is that the data is in the cache, and will be written later.
Reply
Reply
post #85 of 460
2/18/11 at 1:15pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkHotchkiss View Post

Because it is not always considered safe.

If the power goes down before the cache is flushed, you loose that data. With the write-cache disabled, the host gets a confirmation that the data was written to disk. With write-cache enabled, the confirmation is that the data is in the cache, and will be written later.

Makes sense. Mine is on a UPS that will hold it up for 2 hrs and is programmed to shut down with the UPS at 50% battery level so I think I would be okay if there was a power hit... other than the PSU going out in the middle of a write.
Reply
Reply
post #86 of 460
2/18/11 at 1:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkHotchkiss View Post

Because it is not always considered safe.

If the power goes down before the cache is flushed, you loose that data. With the write-cache disabled, the host gets a confirmation that the data was written to disk. With write-cache enabled, the confirmation is that the data is in the cache, and will be written later.

That's weird then that mine was enabled by default . PS you find it in the "storage manager", "HDD Management" tab, and then click the "cache management" button.
Reply
Reply
post #87 of 460
2/18/11 at 1:25pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcfay View Post

That's weird then that mine was enabled by default . PS you find it in the "storage manager", "HDD Management" tab, and then click the "cache management" button.

Mine is enabled by default too. Maybe that's the default in 3.0 which is what I have running.

Thanks for the tip on where to find it!
Reply
Reply
post #88 of 460
2/18/11 at 1:31pm
I have a synology 1010+ (yeah not the same as the new one, but only difference is processor speed and that extra esata port). I love it. I do not use any of the built in apps though. I have turned them all off because I did not like the performance of them, never used them, or found something better. For torrents I installed transmission onto the box. For newsgroup nzb downloads I have a separate linux box that the synology is mounted via NFS to. I don't use the DNLA, just use samba to my boxee box. For offsite backups I'm using Amazon S3 (which synology supports). Works great. I use rsync to copy files from my mac mini across the network to the synology box in a specific directory that then gets backed up to S3 each morning.

One thing I noticed though, before I had my UPS we had power outages in the area. When the box came back up it wasn't connecting via gigabit. I was using cat5e cables and it was connected at gigabit speeds before the power outage. I switched all my cat5e cables (except the ones in the wall) out for cat6 cables and I've gotten gigabit back. So if any of you loose gigabit take a look at your cables.
Reply
Reply
post #89 of 460
2/19/11 at 4:37am
Just adding my thumbs up to the DS1511+. Performance is great and its highly reliable compared to the SATA Raid external enclosures that i previously had connected to my server.

The user and persmissions piece is a little odd if you are used to windows. I'd hate to have to manage this piece for a large amount of users and complex permissioning but i don have that problem.

The system has lots of tools and features most of which i have no use for right now.

My two complaints are the unit does not support my UPS, so i've had to script a critical power failure remote shutdown via my server. Also, the NIC load balancing mode does not work on my switch or many other switches for that matter. I'm having to use basic failure mode which means only one NIC is active and the other is on standby.

Have not had any of the RAID build performance issues described on this thread but that may be because i built the system out with five empty drives and then copied my data to it. The initial build out was pretty quick.
Reply
Reply
post #90 of 460
2/19/11 at 7:32am
Thread Starter 
Load sharing requires that the data switch supports 802.3af which is the industry standard for load balance functionality. Only fully managed gig switches will have this feature, and often only the higher end ones.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Networking, Media Servers & Content Streaming › Synology DS1511+ first look (mini review)