vdatanet 1549 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 Just now, CBers said: What is DAC please? Maybe DAS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBers 6771 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 4 minutes ago, vdatanet said: Maybe DAS? That was my thought as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHA0SENG7NE 28 Posted September 28, 2020 Author Share Posted September 28, 2020 Could you have a DAS connection from the window server to QNAP and using the 4 ports on the QNAP connect to the rest of the network? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vdatanet 1549 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 (edited) 6 minutes ago, CHA0SENG7NE said: Could you have a DAS connection from the window server to QNAP and using the 4 ports on the QNAP connect to the rest of the network? You can do that with some QNAP models with a thunderbolt adapter, but that adapter is not available for your model. This adapter is usually available for 10 Gb models and yours is 1 Gb. Edited September 28, 2020 by vdatanet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHA0SENG7NE 28 Posted September 28, 2020 Author Share Posted September 28, 2020 12 minutes ago, vdatanet said: You can do that with some QNAP models with a thunderbolt adapter, but that adapter is not available for your model. This adapter is usually available for 10 Gb models and yours is 1 Gb. Well that sucks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbjtech 4289 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 32 minutes ago, CBers said: What is DAC please? Sorry, typo - yes DAS - Direct Attached Storage - SATA/SAS.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vdatanet 1549 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 (edited) 41 minutes ago, FrostByte said: In this thread. Only difference is that they are testing server on the Shield and it's buffering when it ran perfect before on his NAS. So this issue is not present in Plex. Can someone repeat the tests using Plex under the same conditions as when the test was done using Emby? I hope you don't get banned for this. My intention is not to advertise Plex is to be able to conclude if it is a hardware limitation. Edited September 28, 2020 by vdatanet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbjtech 4289 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 11 minutes ago, CHA0SENG7NE said: Well that sucks There may be light at the end of the tunnel if what @cayars said can be fully tested (and I have zero reason to doubt him). You basically put a 2nd physical NIC into the emby 'server' and connect this to the NAS, leaving the other NIC to communicate with the clients. We need more details though - if on a separate subnet, if so, how are the networks routing to/from each other. I tried this much earlier in this thread as a separate 'storage vlan' but that made no difference, but I have not done it as a separate storage physical lan. May do so today but if cayars has done this and can provide details - then it may be a solution for you for the sake of an extra NIC in your server.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHA0SENG7NE 28 Posted September 28, 2020 Author Share Posted September 28, 2020 1 minute ago, rbjtech said: There may be light at the end of the tunnel if what @cayars said can be fully tested (and I have zero reason to doubt him). You basically put a 2nd physical NIC into the emby 'server' and connect this to the NAS, leaving the other NIC to communicate with the clients. We need more details though - if on a separate subnet, if so, how are the networks routing to/from each other. I tried this much earlier in this thread as a separate 'storage vlan' but that made no difference, but I have not done it as a separate storage physical lan. May do so today but if cayars has done this and can provide details - then it may be a solution for you for the sake of an extra NIC in your server.. Just for reference the windows server i have has a single nic, I have a usb3 to nic adapter - would that suffice in a test? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbjtech 4289 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 Should be fine yes, assuming the server has full speed USB3 ports - USB2 would not be great .. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlo 4330 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 1 hour ago, CBers said: Not sure I can bullshit as well as you though Just a little practice, not that hard. I know you have it in you. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHA0SENG7NE 28 Posted September 28, 2020 Author Share Posted September 28, 2020 26 minutes ago, rbjtech said: Should be fine yes, assuming the server has full speed USB3 ports - USB2 would not be great .. it does Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbjtech 4289 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 So I have setup my NAS to be on a different physical NIC in the same server - it's on a different VLAN - and the results are the same. Although this time, it can be very clearly seen what the 2nd (storage) NIC is up to - with some VERY interesting developments. 10 Mbit H264 Jellyfish file - Plays OK - Note the limit @ 55 Mbit/sec DESPITE THIS BEING A 10 Mbit File - Note the duration - I did it twice because I missed it the first time. It is NOT streaming ! It is filling a buffer as quickly as it can. The buffer fill is complete before the file has finished playing ... 25 Mbit H264 Jellyfish file - Plays OK - Note the same ~55 Mbit limit - 'buffer' now taking longer to fill / maintain. 50 Mbit H264 Jellyfish file - Note the same limit @ 55 Mbit/sec - Note the duration - twice as long as above .. 100 Mbit H264 Jellyfish file - Note the same limit @ 55 Mbit/sec - Note the duration - twice as long as above .. Playback now stutters.. Nothing is contending on this network. So in summary - despite what I originally thought, the data is not being read as it's needed with a small buffer, it looks to be read as fast as it can with a large buffer - up to a max of 50 Mbit/sec (for me) and then played from the buffer. I would imagine the buffer management or refresh is where things are going wrong ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vdatanet 1549 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 Another test: Emby: Ubuntu Server single NIC 1 Gb Storage: Synology NAS sin NIC 1 Gb Protocol: SMB Media: 1917 about 70 Mbps, audio DD+ Result: Perfect playback without freezing 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vdatanet 1549 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 (edited) Even Jellyfish 120 Mps sample plays without freezing: http://jell.yfish.us/media/jellyfish-120-mbps-4k-uhd-hevc-10bit.mkv I did not expect these results: The Linux SMB client performs better than the native Windows client. Edited September 28, 2020 by vdatanet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbjtech 4289 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 (edited) 32 minutes ago, vdatanet said: I did not expect these results: The Linux SMB client performs better than the native Windows client. Indeed - your LAN traffic is way in excess of 50Mbit/sec. I need to finish off finding out what is happening to the Windows Server (I have procmon from sysinternals running..) but I'd like to try a Unix VM running Emby on the same machine using the same NIC. The plot thickens.. The Windows SMB client is not the issue here - as standalone it can transfer 120 Mbytes/sec over a 1Gig link without issue - however, in combination with the Emby Server - the Emby 'buffer' cannot keep up with high bitrate files - and that's the part we need to find out why. Edited September 28, 2020 by rbjtech 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vdatanet 1549 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 Playing Vertigo without issues: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vdatanet 1549 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 Playing 3 sessions Vertigo: (Shield 1 Gb, Apple TV 1 Gb, Apple TV Wifi), no freezing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBers 6771 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 8 minutes ago, vdatanet said: Playing 3 sessions Vertigo: (Shield 1 Gb, Apple TV 1 Gb, Apple TV Wifi), no freezing So are you saying this is a Windows based issue ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vdatanet 1549 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 6 minutes ago, CBers said: So are you saying this is a Windows based issue ? I suspect so, I can only say that Ubuntu + NAS works for me, playing high bitrate content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbjtech 4289 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 (edited) Although there is another thread with Shield/Android Server having the same issues - I haven't been following that thread so it may not necessarily be only Emby Server for Windows. All I can say is @vdatanet is the only user that is able to run high bitrate content played via SMB - and he is using Emby Server for Ubuntu. Edited September 28, 2020 by rbjtech Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vdatanet 1549 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 (edited) 21 minutes ago, rbjtech said: Although there is another thread with Shield/Android Server having the same issues The difference between me and that Android Server user is that he used the UNC path // server / share, but I have mounted the SMB share on the Linux file system. @Luke recommended that he do it, but the user has not yet reported if it has worked for him. This way I'm using a local path. Edited September 28, 2020 by vdatanet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbjtech 4289 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 Ah right ok - so have you tried direct access SMB without the local Unix mount ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHA0SENG7NE 28 Posted September 28, 2020 Author Share Posted September 28, 2020 18 minutes ago, vdatanet said: The difference between me and that Android Server user is that he used the UNC path // server / share, but I have mounted the SMB share on the Linux file system. @Luke recommended that he do it, but the user has not yet reported if it has worked for him. This way I'm using a local path. Would you be able to give an explanation on how to do this as i'm unsure and then i will test after Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vdatanet 1549 Posted September 28, 2020 Share Posted September 28, 2020 3 minutes ago, rbjtech said: Ah right ok - so have you tried direct access SMB without the local Unix mount ? I will try that tonight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now