flyride

Generally it is to get the i915 driver from Syno's latest update, which is newer than the one Jun compiled as part of the DS918+ 1.04b loader. The other reason is to revert any mangling done to make 6.2.2 functional, as that solution won't work with 6.2.3 (but getting the files from a clean copy of the loader works as well).

Synology allows NFS mounts through File Station. I don't think it's intended for persistence, however. And this approach is really crippling much of the functionality of DSM.

You are probably editing files in /etc The files that the system uses for run-time behavior are in /etc At boot time, files are overwritten in /etc from /etc.defaults So: if you want changes to take place on reboot, edit /etc.defaults if you want changes to take place now, edit /etc if you want changes now and reboot persistence, edit both All bets are off at upgrade, many items are reset to original system values in /etc.defaults during an upgrade.

This is a new spec laptop. Its onboard Intel Ethernet is i219LM which probably isn't supported by the included drivers. Best option is to check into the extra.lzma that IG-88 produces and see if one of the versions has a driver new enough for your card. Sort of a strange computer to run DSM on however, since you won't be able to connect storage devices easily.

Or just buy a cheap Intel CT 1Gbps PCIe card and be done with it.

Synology uses an open source package called "NUT" to provide this service. NUT can talk to a UPS directly, provide a TCP/IP socket to bridge UPS services to another device, or consume UPS services from a device that is providing the NUT service. The error you are getting is saying that NUT cannot connect to another NUT instance with a live TCP/IP socket. That is not what should be happening - you should only be connecting to your USB device via USB. Be sure you aren't checking any network boxes in your Control Panel to keep this simple. It is also possible that the UPS you are using isn't correctly supported by the NUT version Synology supplies. Is your UPS make and model on the Synology QVL?

Neither is true. You should not remove the USB drive as it is required for each boot and during upgrades. DSM is installed to all of the active disks in the system.

Which DSM hardware platform are you trying to install?

Not sure why you chose an obsolete loader and an arbitrarily old DSM version... but whatever works, I guess. If I were you I would at least go to 6.1.7 (build 15284) which should work with the loader you have chosen. However, you are underutilizing your CPU. Max threads are 16 on that DSM platform and you have 24 active threads. You need to turn off hyperthreading to maximize your CPU usage.

Two threads on each side of the same problem. To summarize, when you are running a VM: If you use a .img boot loader mounted to a virtual disk, you need to select the ESXi option on grub boot If you use a USB boot loader (either physical stick passed through to the VM, or emulated USB image), you need to adjust VID/PID in the loader, and select baremetal on grub boot

Be sure you don't forget to adjust the grub boot for ESXi unless you have an actual USB loader that you connect to your VM.

What is the DSM config entry for this? Looked for it a few times but have not found it.

I don't believe there is a MBR version of 1.03b or 1.04b loaders. I posted the active link to the page linking to Jun loaders that currently exist. If someone has packaged a MBR-configured 1.03b/1.04b loader, please share it so the FAQ can be updated, and so that I can update the table here

I remember one other instance where someone was reporting 1 system thread. The /proc/cpuinfo is not cosmetic, it's what the system sees. So there may be an issue with the newest processors and these old Linux kernels. You actually should have 8 threads active as system threads are mapped to hyperthreading. Check and make sure HT is enabled in your system BIOS. EDIT: the E-2224 is apparently a 4-core no HT CPU (since when do any Xeons NOT have hyperthreading?) so 4 threads in DSM is correct

No worries. You'll acquire the linux knowledge soon enough trying all the stuff you are..

I don't know what VMM is doing; I have no reason to use it since ESXi is superior in most every way. You can see how many kernel threads are in use by cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep "^processor" | wc -l That will not tell you which kernel threads are cores and which are hyperthreads, but you should be able to discern it with the total.

Change the loader (replacing DSM to DS3617xs) or disable hyperthreading. You don't need to do both. If you are running 1.03b/DS3617xs, you can have HT on and all kernel threads (12) will be assigned to cores and hyperthreads. If you are running 1.04b/DS918+, you should have HT off and 6 kernel threads will be assigned to cores for best performance. You may have a good reason to run DS918+ (NVMe cache or QuickSync) otherwise your best CPU performance result will be DS3617xs with HT enabled.

That isn't correct, 918+ and 3615xs are 4c8t, 3617xs is 8c16t. Both of you should be disabling HT which reserves all threads for actual cores, for maximum CPU performance on 918+ DSM reports on threads. It's easy to confuse cores and threads with this. https://xpenology.com/forum/topic/13333-tutorialreference-6x-loaders-and-platforms/

The date from the thread you cite is from 2016, before the release of the current loaders. The accuracy of that statement may be in question. You had to originally at least modify the VID/PID and save the image or it won't work at all. If the USB key is not the same brand and model, the VID/PID will have to be updated from that VID/PID to the one for the new key. If the serial number changes from the first key to the second key, or you pick a loader that requires DSM newer than is installed in your disks, it will prompt to either Recover or Upgrade, respectively.

Unlikely to be the software. Check cable, port settings on switch, etc. 11 MBps (not mb/s) transfer rate is commensurate with 100 Mb/s port speed. Fix the port speed and your transfer rate will go up.

Did you remember change your boot mode to Legacy/CSM when you upgraded to 1.03b? That is the common error.

https://xpenology.com/forum/topic/9392-general-faq/?do=findComment&comment=82390 https://xpenology.com/forum/topic/6759-add-extra-license-surveillance-station/?do=findComment&comment=66680 Please review these posts. Using Surveillance Station is not a good idea for the project because of its dependency on real serial numbers.

It is possible to hack a USB-connected disk and treat it as an internal disk so that it may be assigned to a Storage Pool, but it is not a Synology-supported configuration (upgrades can fail) and it is some work to get the external USB disk to be usable but not also your loader USB. https://xpenology.com/forum/topic/9412-max-10-drives-in-dsm-61/?tab=comments#comment-80569 You can't install DSM to a specific disk per se, DSM installs itself to every disk that is assigned to a Storage Pool. There is a way to suppress DSM I/O on specific disks, but that would not apply to your two-disk configuration. This is a little bit semantic, but be advised that NVMe SSD is not supported for regular disk by DSM - only cache device on DS918+. But with a USB to NVMe adapter, DSM will not recognize it as NVMe and it should work for the above scenario on any DSM platform.

DSM is Linux, but a highly modified Linux and many utilities you expect in a normal distro are omitted. There is no compile environment, and many of the system files are changed from standard. It isn't impossible to install directly, but running your apps via Docker is a much better idea.

Sorry, no confusion here. I am not referring to any of those posts. I quoted you specifically from your fifth contribution to this forum, where you decided to admonish a highly respected contributor, bracketed with two paragraphs of tripe about how you wish folks would behave, and the wistful recollection of idealism from the early days of ARPANET. It was all perfectly communicative, thank you. At best, you make it hard to want to help you. I certainly won't forget who you are. At worst, you (and now I) have damaged a valuable information thread and made it less useful. Thus I have no interest in arguing or responding further. This is a multi-national forum and bluntly, spouting on to impress one's self and wasting whitespace arguing semantics is really counterproductive here due to the number of folks who have to translate. In short, this is noise we don't need. Mods, please delete this series of posts if you can possibly see fit.