Jump to content
XPEnology Community

Schnapps

Global Moderator
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    603

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Schnapps

    Xpenolog or Synology?

    in Archives

    Posted

    An xpenobox is more scalable and cheaper but it's not the same thing as the real Synology box.

    A 6-8bay xpenobox is probably cheaper by at least 50% than a synobox (HDDs not taken in consideration) and the synobox has 2bays

     

    Updating xpeno is not hard if the update is done by "The Elder Geeks" of xpenology(meaning h4ck3d). Currently, xpenology cannot be used with the last DSM version.

     

    Uhh, and running games from an iSCSI mapped LUN is doable but the games load slow. Haven't tried yet with normal SMB shares or with SSDs replacing my 4HDDs in SHR1 :smile:

     

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Xpenolog or Synology?

    in Archives

    Posted

    Don't take the B version as it comes with only 2 SATA ports.

    There is a version with a DC adapter(sold separately) that's more efficient in regards to energy consumption and it's also making your case cables-free.

     

    Cheers.

     

     

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Advice for hardware

    in The Noob Lounge

    Posted

    Take care as there are some hardware requirements coming from ESX. Check them as 4GB of RAM is not enough for ESX 5.5 to run.

    If you're a novice in virtualization/xpenology, i recommend using HyperV, but maybe it's also a matter of taste.

    Advice for hardware

    in The Noob Lounge

    Posted

    Checkout my signature. Your system is overkill. You don't need that CPU. Get a low power CPU! Most of the people around don't think that this system should and is running 24/7/365. It uses a lot of power!!

     

    Get an embedded x86_64 CPU and 2GB RAM and it will worth it!

     

     

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Asrock Q1900-ITX/Q1900DC-ITX

    in DSM 5.2 and earlier (Legacy)

    Posted

    Hi all,

     

    Seems that ESXi works if you install another video card. Can someone test and confirm...I'm thinking of ordering this MB.

     

    https://communities.vmware.com/thread/4 ... 5&tstart=0

     

    Thank you.

     

    Knowing that since some time BUT unfortunately, this specific MB doesn't have a GPU slot and therefore, you cannot install a GPU on it.

    What you could try, is to update its BIOS, set it up as for "production" with all BIOS settings, pull out the HDD/SSD used for installing ESX, and do the installation on another computer where you have a GPU.

    After ESX is installed, you can migrate the HDD/SSD back to the NAS and boot as usual.

    For me it worked just fine with this procedure but anyhow I like HyperV a lot more and I stick to it as it offers me more options.

     

    Cheers!

     

     

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    XPEnology gnoBoot

    in DSM 5.2 and earlier (Legacy)

    Posted

    It took so long before finally releasing this iSCSI patch to the community. I'm no longer interested in maintaining/keeping this stuff.

     

    Releasing my kernel build script soon, but no support or whatever. If you want to donate or appreciate my work email me.

     

    Really a shame to see you go Gnoboot :-/

     

     

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Asrock Q1900-ITX/Q1900DC-ITX

    in DSM 5.2 and earlier (Legacy)

    Posted

    Hello,

    I'm going to build my first NAS based on Q1900 with XPEnology OS and I would like to ask you which motherboard has lower power consumption - Asrock Q1900-ITX (with 80PLUS Gold PSU) or Q1900DC-ITX (with power supply from old laptop). In both cases I will use 2pcs of WD Red 3TB (Raid 1) and 1pc of 4GB of RAM module.

    Thanks,

    Petben

     

    It doesn't matter. You can use a 1200W PSU and (theoretically) the energy consumption is the same as a 90W DC "power supply"

     

    What it does matter, is that the PSU gives the right amount of power that the hardware needs.

     

    For example, a 4x 4TB HDD with 2x DIMM RAM cards and 1x PCIe card with 2 SSDs consume 40W. If the DC power supply is 90W. So it should work just fine.

    U-NAS 800 With ASROCK C2750D4I

    in Archives

    Posted

    that is, the version 5.1 will be the same as the nanobot will not be to recompile the kernel because it will not be available sources patch to bypass security. because it is heavy, secret work :smile:. I'm sorry, but I do not accept this, especially since there is no official price list - I need a system where I can compile the kernel itself and not be at the mercy of someone. I know that the Russian forum a lot going on, but the Russians do not share their knowledge with others and my knowlenge Russian spoke is a little rusty :smile:

    Let me translate it for you, my unthankful, greedy and ignorant friend :smile:

    Demand the source codes and toolkits directly from Synology. Maybe they will share it and other secrets with you personally since you don't accept anything otherwise.

    As for Russians not sharing - this is completely BS. The entire forum was created, paid and maintained by Russians and many of them post on both forums. Some take an extra care to translate the most interesting developments and news to other forums.

    It is a good time to refresh your "rusty Russian spoke". While trying to troll there, you may learn a lot about yourself since much meaning is lost in translation.

    Do not thank me. This is a public service.

     

    "For mother Russia" :smile:)

     

     

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Asrock Q1900-ITX/Q1900DC-ITX

    in DSM 5.2 and earlier (Legacy)

    Posted

    Yes i changed the cables and both are cat.5e.

    I also tried on a newer laptop and it was about 20MB/a more, so I reached about 65MB/s.

     

    Both of them were connected to a gigabit router.

     

    I'm not so expert but I think it could even depend from the xpe driver, that's why I would try with hyper-v, maybe the network adapter is better supported on win server.

     

    DUDE,

    65MB/s for a SATA disk is THE limit. You won't get faster unless you have a RAID matrix.

    Cheer up and don't change your config due to performance. It's working fine just with 1 drive.

    Asrock Q1900-ITX/Q1900DC-ITX

    in DSM 5.2 and earlier (Legacy)

    Posted

    i have between 90 and 110 mb/s per second from windows 8.1 over gigabit lan, from disk to disk.

     

    I tried again, Win8.1 says 35/40MB/s and it's not stable at all!! I don't know which is the problem.

     

    Here is my config

     

    Q1900-ITX + 4GB Ram

    WD RED 3TB (1 disk at the moment without raid)

    Nanoboot-5.0.3.2 DSM 5.0-4528 X64 Update 1

     

    Any suggestions? Have someone else the same config? I'm thinking to re-install everything again.

    I have a constant 120MB/s transfer on big files@HyperV

    Which Server you have? Hyper-V Server or 2012 Server with Hyper-V? I tried on a virtual machine the Hyper-V Server (the free one) but it's very hard to configure! Can you give me some tips?

     

    Well, then that's the max speed that drive can have and the speed degrades so much at a certain moment in time because the buffer is getting filled up

    Asrock Q1900-ITX/Q1900DC-ITX

    in DSM 5.2 and earlier (Legacy)

    Posted

    i have between 90 and 110 mb/s per second from windows 8.1 over gigabit lan, from disk to disk.

     

    I tried again, Win8.1 says 35/40MB/s and it's not stable at all!! I don't know which is the problem.

     

    Here is my config

     

    Q1900-ITX + 4GB Ram

    WD RED 3TB (1 disk at the moment without raid)

    Nanoboot-5.0.3.2 DSM 5.0-4528 X64 Update 1

     

    Any suggestions? Have someone else the same config? I'm thinking to re-install everything again.

    I have a constant 120MB/s transfer on big files@HyperV

    Which Server you have? Hyper-V Server or 2012 Server with Hyper-V? I tried on a virtual machine the Hyper-V Server (the free one) but it's very hard to configure! Can you give me some tips?

     

    Well, then that's the max speed that drive can have and the speed degrades so much at a certain moment in time because the buffer is getting filled up

×
×
  • Create New...