GaryM
-
Posts
36 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by GaryM
-
-
Outcome of the update: UNSUCCESSFUL
- DSM version prior update: DSM 6.1.5-15254 Update 1
- Loader version and model: JUN'S LOADER v1.02b - DS3617xs
- Using custom extra.lzma: NO
- Installation type: VM (ESXi 6.0) AMD CPU 4284
- Additional comments: DSM not found on lan after auto update, manual update, or a clean install of 6.1.6. Reinstalled 6.1.5 DS3671xs, all is now Good.
Wanted to see if DS3615 had the same problem so I did a fresh install of DSM 6.1.5-15254 with the above loader for DS3615xs, works well, then did a manual update to DSM 6.1.6 with no problems. For me this shows I now have to use DS3615xs going forward.
-
On 10/19/2017 at 11:16 AM, setzer715 said:
This is a bit of an old post and not sure I'll get a response but I'm curious about the cache a bit more. I'll have exactly 8gig of RAM. Would my system be ok without cache?
You read my findings, have your test results been the same as mine?
-
AMD Opteron
ESXi 6.0 M1015 HBA
Synoboot 1.02b DS3617
from DSM 6.1.3-15152 Update 3 to Update 4
Updated very well via Synology Control Panel menu. Took 2 minutes of the 10. Rebooted itself back to a running system only needing a regular log in.
-
well super member, if you were to read the threads you would have found your answer without making a new thread. This is the biggest problem with this forum, people want to get quick answers without reading. As a result there are thousands of threads that are useless and a waste of time for people who do read to wade through. It!s time the moderators delete all but a dozen threads of value, so the information people want can be found. I do see why you don!t want to waste your time reading this mostly outdated garbage. sorry.
-
On 5/30/2017 at 3:28 PM, Twisted said:
Each NIC is set to 1500 MTU. I have tried to link the 4 ports on the card, then I tried linking the all 5th ports, including the one on the motherboard to test and both configurations error out. The challenge is it breaks the installation, so I hate to keep rolling the dice.
Set the motherboard nic up for access to DSM as a maintenance only IP. Use all other ports for play or data. If you mess us the data config you can fix things by access via your normal DSM IP.
-
On 6/2/2017 at 9:56 AM, b0fh said:
You will need to move to 10gbps (or faster) interfaces for that then.
You are right on this one. I have a cisco SG200-08 and I won't bother using it for this because with a simple 2 nic bond in DSM3617xs I upload at 105 Mbytes/s and download at 115 Mbytes/s, fast enough for what I want to do. But, if time is money, then one has to spend money in the right place.
-
5 hours ago, b0fh said:
GaryM - that is an intel chipset. Seriously - keep up.
You must have one of these HP cards to know it's an 82571EB chipset. Thanks for taking the time to tell me. I use the Intel version of this 4 port board in my Sophos firewall and have no problems with throughput at all. Looks like someone should verify that the nic card works in another system, unless you know he's done that too.
-
14 hours ago, Twisted said:
That's what I am using. Trying to figure out why i'm still at 100mb. Trying to see what other cards people are using.
So you really are at 100 mega bits/s and not just careless with your upper case? sorry.
I have learned long ago that if you have a choice, only use Intel or Intel chipset network cards.
-
On 2017-06-12 at 0:06 AM, Twisted said:
@Polanskiman Thank you! You are the man as usual
Now that I have corrected the error message, I am still getting only 100mb/second. How is your speed? Maybe I need another NIC card?
Yes 100 mb (mega bits) is very slow. You should be getting about 100 MB/s (mega bytes) write and higher reads. You should try a GB nic. and get about 8 times better throughput.
-
On 6/12/2017 at 0:06 AM, Twisted said:
@Polanskiman Thank you! You are the man as usual
Now that I have corrected the error message, I am still getting only 100mb/second. How is your speed? Maybe I need another NIC card?
Something else to think about, a lagg from the xpenology box to cisco is great, but have you thought about the lagg from your computer to the cisco switch? If you want throughput all lanes need to be fast and wide or your NAS will have throughput capacity from multiple machines but not from only one.
-
On 6/10/2017 at 10:30 AM, wocaple said:
I DONT KNOW THE EXACT SOLUTION to not lose data from the disks
Make sure you have a backup of your data. Then anything is fine, even a full install.
-
On 6/5/2017 at 9:48 AM, miicker said:
I have build my own NAS with 8GB ram. At this moment I have Jun's loader running on a 64GB usb 3.0 flash drive but I am thinking about installing an M.2 SSD and installing ESXi on it.
Now my question is, what will this do in terms of performance? Will XPenology perform the same way on ESXi as it does bare metal, or will performance go down?
The reason I wan't to use ESXi is that I can install another VM. At this moment I use an old Windows 10 Computer to do some internet browsing and run Kodi on (it is connected to my TV), it would be nice to just connect my NAS with an HDMI cable to my TV so I won't need the Windows computer any longer. Some advice would be nice
Thanks in advance!
Are you willing to learn to use ESXi, does your CPU and motherboard support Vt-d, will your SAS/SATA controller pass through to a VM the way you expect. Google is your friend, see if what you have will work. Intel, AMD, VMware and your hardware makers all have what you need to know. Remember to do it right, unlike many who are to lazy.
-
On 6/13/2017 at 1:46 PM, 463nt0ran63 said:
One question to you guys trying to pass-through a raid controller in esxi : why?
I simply pass the disk through with some esxi commands
Why, because that is the proper way of doing it, pass it through so the software has full control. If you are going to use ESXi, learn about it as well.
When you have to replace a HD you will be happy you did it right.
Your motherboard and cpu both have to support Vt-d. Check at ark.intel.com for your cpu and check your BIOS for a Vt-d switch or support.
-
21 hours ago, hpk said:
6.1.2-15132 Update from 6.1.1-15101 failed on ESXi Server as several discovered already.
Therefore, I did the following to bring it up & running:I did a fresh install in a new directory on the ESXi server with an 8GB virtual disk.
6.1.2-15132 installs without any issues.
I shut down the virual machine and moved the second virtual disk (4TB) from the 6.1.1-15101 installation to the new 6.1.2 installation directory.
Then in VM settings I added this existing virtual disk with all my data to the newly created virtual machine.
After restart, DSM reported an error on the new volume and offered to repair it (my guess, it copied the 200MB DSM files from the 8GB virtual disk one to the 4TB virtual disk two, as they were not the same).
I started the repair routine wich ended up with an okay.
After a reboot, everything was up and running, all data on my big virtual disk were there.So, for me it worked, hovewer:
Don't forget, Jun's 1.02a loader is in alpha status.
If you are testing things as I explained above, make shure you have a good backup concept.
That it worked for me on my ESXi server does not mean, it works at your's as well.
So be cautious and backup your valuable data before experimentig ...Good luck
This method worked for me with ESXi 6.0.
Upgrading in ESXi doesn't work as has been said.
This is the easiest way to get a running DSM 6.1.2 xpenology system in ESXi and move your data over safely.
-
Update to U4 is safe. Works for me!
-
I agree that the development side of XPEnology seems to have dropped off a bit but you can't hold anyone at fault. I'm still on 5.x at the moment and will probably jump to the release of FREENAS 10 when it hits on 03/06/2017.
Why not do both, Xpenology with BTRFS+ SHR for the various sizes of odd disks and Freenas for the top security of data via ZFS. That is the benefit of using ESXi and VMs. Run any number of apps well and safely.
-
I agree that the development side of XPEnology seems to have dropped off a bit but you can't hold anyone at fault. I'm still on 5.x at the moment and will probably jump to the release of FREENAS 10 when it hits on 03/06/2017.
Why not do both, Xpenology with BTRFS+ SHR for the various sizes of odd disks and Freenas for the top security of data via ZFS. That is the benefit of using ESXi and VMs. Run any number of apps well and safely.
-
I would also, as haydibe, suggest to stzart using Docker more and stop waiting for Syno third party packages to get some attention. Example: http://tools.linuxserver.io/dockers
You can find basically everythiing that is able to run on linux on Docker hub already, and the good thing is, you can mess with containers as much as you want and at the end of the day just recreate them without putting your box or data in danger.
The key part of using a NAS, remember what a Synology box is?, is storing your data & without putting your box or data in danger. All the other software or garbage attached can be accomplished in any number of other ways. Secure your data first! The problem is Synology wants profits to grow so they have to dream up the next thing that a user might want and they just keep adding to the pile.
If you run Xpenology in an ESXi VM, keep it as a NAS, then run all the other stuff in VMs safely.
-
Hello,
I know that AMD hardware (N54L) is currently not working with 1.02 and 6.1... on a baremetal
Question: Can I use the N54L hardware if I install the 1.02 / 6.1 combo on a esxi basis?
Thanks for your answers..
gerof
First try ESXi, ver 5.5, 6.0, or I won't 6.x, and find out if you can run "it". Google is your friend.
-
What is the advantages, disadvantages and difference between Baremetal, ESXi and VmWare?
If one is using server grade hardware, has more than what's needed for DSM in ram and CPU, has a HBA to connect to hard drives, then all that would be a waste just to run DSM. By using ESXi which is Vmware, one can make full use of all the hardware one has.
ESXi gives one full control of the resources that a Virtual Machine has. For DSM, it makes it very easy to create and install a running session of DSM. Or even multiple sessions of DSM. I find that in many cases software runs better in a VM than bare metal.
-
OK, I thought it to be a good idea to share my experience (and frustration) here to help others and prevent them form loosing time etc.
I have been running Xpenology for a while now, first native on my HP proliant micro server G7 and then moved to a HP proliant xenon based server with ESXI 5.5 and now 6.0 with vmdk files.
..................
Thank for your patience if you red though the whole thing.
If you are going to use ESXI you should be passing the controller through to the VM and let DSM handle the drives directly. If you use an expander, it might work for sata drives but is not recomended unless you, use SAS drives. What is your data worth to you?
-
Hi there
I'm currently using a 256GB SSD as an SSD Cache on DSM6.1.
Turns out I can only use the disk as a cache for ONE volume. Seems like an awful waste.
Is there any way to tweak things so I can use a single disk as a cache for two volumes? Even better would be to use the remainder as an additional volume.
Possible?
If you do some system testing you will probably find that your current use of a cache ssd is also a waste. DSM Doesn't even use large amounts of memory the way you might expect, so there can be another waste. Test your system remove the ssd cache and test again.
I have found no value is a ssd cache and any memory greater than 8 Gb.
-
Are you referring to running Xpenology on top of a virtualisation layer for production? As that would be an incredibly dumb idea from many perspectives.
If you're instead asking about replacing Xpenology with VMware then I'd say it's a good idea if you do an ample amount of virtualisation. Personally I'd host my datastore on a FreeNAS or Xpenology for the performance and backup features they offer.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I believe he is asking about running Xpenology in an ESXi VM vs bare metal.
One would be insane to use the built in virtualization built into Xpenology vs VMware or other well developed methods, unless it's, just to try it.
Who would use Xpenology for production? I would fire you for even suggesting that!
Now that said, I run Xpenology in an ESXi 6.0 VM, and it runs very well and I will not run it bare metal, but for my Sophos firewall I run it bare metal, save lots of problems when you play with servers and VM's. The only reason I use Xpenology is for hobby use and because of SHR. It makes the best use of old odd sized hard drives. For any other important storage I use ZFS, whether it is freenas, nas4free or omnios & napp-it.
-
Did a control panel update from DSM6.1.1-15101-1 to update 2, on an ESXi6.0 VM.
Working well after a day and a half running the update.
DSM 6.1.7-15284
in DSM Updates Reporting
Posted
- Outcome of the update: SUCCESSFUL
- DSM version prior update: DSM 6.1.6 15266
- Loader version and model: JUN'S LOADER v1.02b - DS3615xs
- Using custom extra.lzma: NO
- Installation type: ESXi 6.0.0 AMD Opteron 4284
- Additional comments: Clean update and 2 min for the reboot