Using a nVidia Shield (Pro) + Synology as a server

[HawkXP71 112]

Not sure if this should go in the Synology group, and there isnt a nVidia Shield group yet. So here goes

While I love my synology NAS as a NAS, Ive been less than thrilled with it as a media server.  I have a 920+ after my 918+ had the reset button failure.  And while it works, Ive just always been disappointed in the transcoding ability when needed.  Also, the NAS is a NAS not a media server

My thoughts where to use a NUC style box and connect them via the network, so the media itself is on the NAS, but the computation server + the databases would be on the NUC.  

All the databases take up about 11gb and my non media data in the libraries is about 55gb (BIF files, png, jpgs etc etc)

I figured using a SMB mount would work, and be fast enough.

Then I bought a nVidia Shield (non-pro), and Im wondering if the shield would work as the server? 

Has anyone done this? 
Is the SMB mount fast enough?  Id be ok with a slightly slower scan and BIF generation times, as long as the streaming is fine.  The two boxes would be connected to the same local 10 gbe gigabit switch, so throughput between the two even at 1gbe should be fine.

How stable is the nVidia Shield app?  On Synology its been rock solid.

Is this just dumb? Or is it a good idea?

What about search speed? This is where the DSM just bogs down quite a bit.  Searching for a particular piece of media

Edited March 1, 2023 by HawkXP71

[muzicman0 84]

SMB is more than fast enough if you are using Wired Ethernet, and even wireless if it's decent.  I don't use a NUC (although I have in the past), and that setup sounds just fine, and will work much better than the Synology for transcoding.

I have a Synology DS216j that has my media on it (including UHD disc rips) and they play just fine on both of my Shield Pros (as a client - one wireless, and one hardwired).  I don't do much transcoding though, the Shield handles pretty much any file I throw at it with no transcoding needed.

Personally I wouldn't use the Shield as a server, especially the non-pro, but you can always try it.

Edited March 1, 2023 by muzicman0
Clarity

[rbjtech 5284]

The 920+ should be capable of using the UHD onboard graphics for transcoding (if you have premier) - so rather than change platform - is it worth investigating why that is not performing ?

Maybe post a log of it transcoding ?

If it's trying to do it via CPU, then that would explain the performance issues for example.

The 920+ also has some options that make it a much better transcoding platform - such as using optional SSD drives (for transcoding temp storage) and possibly increasing the device memory.

Edited March 1, 2023 by rbjtech

[ebr 16185]

14 hours ago, HawkXP71 said:

Then I bought a nVidia Shield (non-pro)

Hi.  I doubt that will be able to handle transcoding any better.  Especially if you are also using it as the playback device.

[HawkXP71 112]

21 minutes ago, ebr said:

Hi.  I doubt that will be able to handle transcoding any better.  Especially if you are also using it as the playback device.

Two different nvidia shields, one as a client one as the servee

[HawkXP71 112]

5 hours ago, rbjtech said:

The 920+ should be capable of using the UHD onboard graphics for transcoding (if you have premier) - so rather than change platform - is it worth investigating why that is not performing ?

Maybe post a log of it transcoding ?

If it's trying to do it via CPU, then that would explain the performance issues for example.

The 920+ also has some options that make it a much better transcoding platform - such as using optional SSD drives (for transcoding temp storage) and possibly increasing the device memory.

It does transcoding fine.  It's more of the cpu being overloaded due to other uses of the NAS

[rbjtech 5284]

18 minutes ago, HawkXP71 said:

It does transcoding fine.  It's more of the cpu being overloaded due to other uses of the NAS

Rather than move emby off the NAS, I'd be inclined to move the other services off the NAS and onto another low powered device on the network.  

[HawkXP71 112]

12 minutes ago, rbjtech said:

Rather than move emby off the NAS, I'd be inclined to move the other services off the NAS and onto another low powered device on the network.  

Unfortunately they are very much tied to data and data protection.  It may be too much for the CPU of the NAS box, however, to have things like AD services on the NAS.

[HawkXP71 112]

18 minutes ago, rbjtech said:

Rather than move emby off the NAS, I'd be inclined to move the other services off the NAS and onto another low powered device on the network.  

Example, I just added a TV series onto my NAS.

Right now, the BIF extraction which doesnt appear to use the GPU at all, is taking up 25%+ of my CPU.  

Edited March 1, 2023 by HawkXP71

[rbjtech 5284]

5 minutes ago, HawkXP71 said:

Example, I just added a TV series onto my NAS.

Right now, the BIF extraction which doesnt appear to use the GPU at all, is taking up 25%+ of my CPU.  

Yep, it wouldn't do and there is no advantage in using GPU either for this type of process.   For cpu intensive tasks, then all I can suggest is to schedule them out of peak hours, don't try and process them real-time.

[HawkXP71 112]

11 minutes ago, rbjtech said:

Yep, it wouldn't do and there is no advantage in using GPU either for this type of process.   For cpu intensive tasks, then all I can suggest is to schedule them out of peak hours, don't try and process them real-time.

Yeah.  That's why I'm looking at a way to separate cpu based functionality. 

One idea, for the live library scan, is to have more than a "yes/no", but a yes for 1 or 2 newly added media files (with a user based number), and if more than that number is added, then don't add them to the library until the scheduled task

 

Edit: or have a mode of during on hours (what ever the user set) add the media in the fastest way possible.  Ie, no bif generation, no TV show start/end analysis etc. 

Edited March 1, 2023 by HawkXP71

[rbjtech 5284]

9 minutes ago, HawkXP71 said:

Yeah.  That's why I'm looking at a way to separate cpu based functionality. 

One idea, for the live library scan, is to have more than a "yes/no", but a yes for 1 or 2 newly added media files (with a user based number), and if more than that number is added, then don't add them to the library until the scheduled task

 

Edit: or have a mode of during on hours (what ever the user set) add the media in the fastest way possible.  Ie, no bif generation, no TV show start/end analysis etc. 

Maybe worth a feature request.

What I tend to do is load the items into a holding area - which is on the same disk pool, but is not being scanned by emby.   Then when it's complete, the batch is 'moved' to the emby scanning area (it's a logical move, no files are actually moved), which then emby picks it up.    This is much more efficient than trying to add a file at a time because emby then see's it and tries to process it at the same time as other files are still being copied.

Edited March 1, 2023 by rbjtech