Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Having problems copying large files
#16
Same issue for me, "Unix extensions" already have been enabled, yet (as already stated above) copying large files does not work.
Reply
#17
Think I found the solution!

I just made 2 changes, and I'm not positive on which one did it (though I'm almost positive)

On that same screen with the unix extensions, I disabled Samba anonymous notifications, and I changed Samba to compatible mode (which I assume is the real change I needed to make).

When I tried copying a file it IMMEDIATELY started working.

Hope this helps people out.
Reply
#18
Think I found the solution!

I just made 2 changes, and I'm not positive on which one did it (though I'm almost positive)

On that same screen with the unix extensions, I disabled Samba anonymous notifications, and I changed Samba to compatible mode (which I assume is the real change I needed to make).

When I tried copying a file it IMMEDIATELY started working.

Hope this helps people out.
Reply
#19
Hi guys,

I have a Thecus 5200xxx and have had the same problems and this is how I think I temporarily solved it for me.

I tried the Samba compatible mode, I tried factory settings reset, tried using RichCopy 4.0 and everything else that was listed/suggested which did not work.

However, the status of my RAID5 NAS was that it was 90% full (as in, receiving warnings advising that I only have 1TB worth of space left). My problem arose when I started getting those warnings -- so I've deleted some stuff (reluctantly) to free up some space so the 90% warning goes away, and now I can copy to the NAS with no problems -- basically to what it was before.

So I haven't seen anyone mention that perhaps there is a RAID5 limitation that there needs to be >10% free space available or not -- but for my similar problem as everyone else, this seemed to have solved it.

I am running the latest firmware as well -- so I assume that, when I reach that threshold again of the 90% warning, it may resort back to not wanting to copy anything more than 500mb again.
Reply
#20
Hi guys,

I have a Thecus 5200xxx and have had the same problems and this is how I think I temporarily solved it for me.

I tried the Samba compatible mode, I tried factory settings reset, tried using RichCopy 4.0 and everything else that was listed/suggested which did not work.

However, the status of my RAID5 NAS was that it was 90% full (as in, receiving warnings advising that I only have 1TB worth of space left). My problem arose when I started getting those warnings -- so I've deleted some stuff (reluctantly) to free up some space so the 90% warning goes away, and now I can copy to the NAS with no problems -- basically to what it was before.

So I haven't seen anyone mention that perhaps there is a RAID5 limitation that there needs to be >10% free space available or not -- but for my similar problem as everyone else, this seemed to have solved it.

I am running the latest firmware as well -- so I assume that, when I reach that threshold again of the 90% warning, it may resort back to not wanting to copy anything more than 500mb again.
Reply
#21
Hi,

I agree with cg152394, on my N4100Pro, since I reached the 90% full warning, I can't even copy a 50Mb file Cry
And the worst of all is that every time I've tried to copy something, my NAS was going AWOL... No response at all. No WAN, no LAN and no web interface, the only option left is to shutdown :|
N4100Pro - OS: OMV Stone Burner 2.2.5 (Kernel 3.2.0) - RAM: 1GB - Capacity: 12TB RAID 5 - FS: XFS
Reply
#22
I've had the same sorts of problems -- even with a NAS that's not even 50% full and all the usual suggestions made.

My thread is here:
<!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href="http://forum.thecus.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=7922">viewtopic.php?f=12&t=7922</a><!-- l -->

I'll let you know what comes of the technical support ticket. With any luck, our issues may be related, so I'll pass along anything we find out in case it might be of use to you.
Reply
#23
I've had the same sorts of problems -- even with a NAS that's not even 50% full and all the usual suggestions made.

My thread is here:
<!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href="http://forum.thecus.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=7922">viewtopic.php?f=12&t=7922</a><!-- l -->

I'll let you know what comes of the technical support ticket. With any luck, our issues may be related, so I'll pass along anything we find out in case it might be of use to you.
Reply
#24
Hi blairbends,
Thank you in advance, let's hope that your problem will quickly finds a solution.
FYI, I've just tested the "Samba in compatibility mode" trick and I've uploaded three 2GB files just right now. Confusedhock:
I'm using a N4100Pro with only SMB (default, no choice) and AFP activated, and I'm on Mavericks (10.9.3)
I will continue my tests and if (when) something goes wrong, I'll let you know.
N4100Pro - OS: OMV Stone Burner 2.2.5 (Kernel 3.2.0) - RAM: 1GB - Capacity: 12TB RAID 5 - FS: XFS
Reply
#25
Hi blairbends,
Thank you in advance, let's hope that your problem will quickly finds a solution.
FYI, I've just tested the "Samba in compatibility mode" trick and I've uploaded three 2GB files just right now. Confusedhock:
I'm using a N4100Pro with only SMB (default, no choice) and AFP activated, and I'm on Mavericks (10.9.3)
I will continue my tests and if (when) something goes wrong, I'll let you know.
N4100Pro - OS: OMV Stone Burner 2.2.5 (Kernel 3.2.0) - RAM: 1GB - Capacity: 12TB RAID 5 - FS: XFS
Reply
#26
PsyKo Wrote:Hi blairbends,
Thank you in advance, let's hope that your problem will quickly finds a solution.
FYI, I've just tested the "Samba in compatibility mode" trick and I've uploaded three 2GB files just right now. Confusedhock:
I'm using a N4100Pro with only SMB (default, no choice) and AFP activated, and I'm on Mavericks (10.9.3)
I will continue my tests and if (when) something goes wrong, I'll let you know.

My MacBook is on 10.9.3 as well, and I can tell you that using AFP over my gigabit Netgear switch, I'm able to read at about 20-25 MB/s. If I connect directly via WAN2, it's about double that.

Every other connection method (like SMB from Win7, even on a high-end gigabit card) is just awful...even when directly connected. I've never seen reads or writes go above about 5.5 MB/s over SMB...and yes my jumbo frames are configured correctly and yes I've tried all the different SMB settings and yes I've directly connected. I also know it's not my NIC or either machine, because I can copy files between them using SMB at about 80-100 MB/s. So, while I understand there's some overhead because of RAID-5 or RAID-6, 5.5 MB/s is pathetic. Did I mention I'm using extremely fast drives? And yes, I have the latest firmware.

SMB performance on the N4100PRO is just abysmal. My suggestion would be to use it one of two ways:
- AFP in Mac OS X
- NFS in Linux (or if you have Win 7 Ultimate, Win 8, or Windows Server 2008 or better -- the versions of windows that support NFS)

Speed/throughput wise, it boils down to this:
NFS > AFP > SMB

Why Thecus can't seem to get SMB to perform worth a damn is apparently beyond human understanding. They should be embarrassed, but don't seem to care.

EDIT: I'm done with Thecus...not worth the hassle/setback anymore. After doing thorough research and consulting many friends with many brands of NAS units, I'm switching to QNAP and never looking back. Look around for benchmarks, such as the QNAP TS-569-PRO (5-drive bay) -- and there's also a very reasonably-priced 8-bay unit from QNAP as well. Their performance and UI blows everyone else out of the water. Not to mention how many USB (2x3.0, 4x2.0) and eSATA (2) slots the thing has. It's just amazing...I'm actually copying everything off my N4100PRO, because I'm just tired of dealing with how slow, unreliable, and unpredictable the N4100PRO is...and I'm also frustrated with how slowly Thecus releases firmware. Also, they don't support filesystems I'd like to use that come standard on QNAP's models.

In retrospect, buying the N4100PRO was a mistake. I should have done my research. I have now, and it's QNAP from here on.

You listening, Thecus? Most of us think this unit sucks. Do you care? All the evidence points to a resounding "nope!".
Reply
#27
PsyKo Wrote:Hi blairbends,
Thank you in advance, let's hope that your problem will quickly finds a solution.
FYI, I've just tested the "Samba in compatibility mode" trick and I've uploaded three 2GB files just right now. Confusedhock:
I'm using a N4100Pro with only SMB (default, no choice) and AFP activated, and I'm on Mavericks (10.9.3)
I will continue my tests and if (when) something goes wrong, I'll let you know.

My MacBook is on 10.9.3 as well, and I can tell you that using AFP over my gigabit Netgear switch, I'm able to read at about 20-25 MB/s. If I connect directly via WAN2, it's about double that.

Every other connection method (like SMB from Win7, even on a high-end gigabit card) is just awful...even when directly connected. I've never seen reads or writes go above about 5.5 MB/s over SMB...and yes my jumbo frames are configured correctly and yes I've tried all the different SMB settings and yes I've directly connected. I also know it's not my NIC or either machine, because I can copy files between them using SMB at about 80-100 MB/s. So, while I understand there's some overhead because of RAID-5 or RAID-6, 5.5 MB/s is pathetic. Did I mention I'm using extremely fast drives? And yes, I have the latest firmware.

SMB performance on the N4100PRO is just abysmal. My suggestion would be to use it one of two ways:
- AFP in Mac OS X
- NFS in Linux (or if you have Win 7 Ultimate, Win 8, or Windows Server 2008 or better -- the versions of windows that support NFS)

Speed/throughput wise, it boils down to this:
NFS > AFP > SMB

Why Thecus can't seem to get SMB to perform worth a damn is apparently beyond human understanding. They should be embarrassed, but don't seem to care.

EDIT: I'm done with Thecus...not worth the hassle/setback anymore. After doing thorough research and consulting many friends with many brands of NAS units, I'm switching to QNAP and never looking back. Look around for benchmarks, such as the QNAP TS-569-PRO (5-drive bay) -- and there's also a very reasonably-priced 8-bay unit from QNAP as well. Their performance and UI blows everyone else out of the water. Not to mention how many USB (2x3.0, 4x2.0) and eSATA (2) slots the thing has. It's just amazing...I'm actually copying everything off my N4100PRO, because I'm just tired of dealing with how slow, unreliable, and unpredictable the N4100PRO is...and I'm also frustrated with how slowly Thecus releases firmware. Also, they don't support filesystems I'd like to use that come standard on QNAP's models.

In retrospect, buying the N4100PRO was a mistake. I should have done my research. I have now, and it's QNAP from here on.

You listening, Thecus? Most of us think this unit sucks. Do you care? All the evidence points to a resounding "nope!".
Reply
#28
Well...blairblends.

if you wanna compare a 4 year old AMD Geode NAS with an up to date Dual Core Atom NAS...?
That´s very "interesting" from my perspective.

If you would run an N5550, N4800Eco or N7510, and would be disappointed by Performance, that would be more reasonable!
At least these products provide way more Performance as they run the identical Intel Atom used in the QNAP TS-X69(L).

Cheers,
Christian
Reply
#29
Well...blairblends.

if you wanna compare a 4 year old AMD Geode NAS with an up to date Dual Core Atom NAS...?
That´s very "interesting" from my perspective.

If you would run an N5550, N4800Eco or N7510, and would be disappointed by Performance, that would be more reasonable!
At least these products provide way more Performance as they run the identical Intel Atom used in the QNAP TS-X69(L).

Cheers,
Christian
Reply
#30
ok... Confusedhock:
As I can understand your bitterness, I cannot understand your... well... explosion.
As GE-BD said in its post, if you want to compare your N4100Pro, compare it with a NAS about the same generation! :roll:
I'm using 2 iMac (mid2010 and mid2011), a PowerMac G4 (yes... G4 :lol: ) Gigabit Ethernet and a PowerMac G5, there's no Win-something AT ALL in my studio :evil: , so I cannot compare Samba performance with.
I do not use a dedicated switch but the built-in switch of my freebox (yes, I'm in france), the G4 and the G5 share the ethernet connection of the mid2010, the mid2011 is directly plugged in, and the NAS uses 2 ports configured in load balance mode. And I have no problem with my 25-30 MB/s!
At the moment I type my post, a HD film is read from the NAS on the mid2010, and I'm listening to music (FLAC and ALAC only, from the NAS, of course) on the mid2011.
I do not use jumbo frames, in my case, there's no gain to do so.
I do not have any fast nor extremely fast drives, I'm using 4 TB WD Red and Seagate NAS drives, that's all.

If you are looking for performance, allow me a suggestion: don't use a NAS but a DAS!
If you need a NAS AND the performance... well... buying a brand new NAS is perhaps the good solution :geek:
But... Just as a reminder, when the N4100Pro was brand new, the QNAP with the same performance, possibilities and hard drive bays, only cost twice the price Tongue

Anyway, you're a big boy now, you can make your choices and do your mistakes all alone :!:
Farewell my pugnacious friend Big Grin
N4100Pro - OS: OMV Stone Burner 2.2.5 (Kernel 3.2.0) - RAM: 1GB - Capacity: 12TB RAID 5 - FS: XFS
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)