New user's registration have been closed due to high spamming and low trafic on this forum. Please contact forum admins directly if you need an account. Thanks !

Better performance for DLNA than NFS on B3

Got problems with your B2 or B3? Share and get helped!
AzP
Posts: 60
Joined: 04 Mar 2011, 08:09

Re: Better performance for DLNA than NFS on B3

Post by AzP »

6feet5 wrote:
AzP wrote:This sounds very interesting... So the 720p file was on your B3, shared via Samba/NFS in the first test as well? That is really weird, why should my B3/TVix combination stir up trouble when yours doesn't?
Are you using any special settings on your NFS share?
The TViX had no problems playing the 720p file on my B3, it worked fine via both samba and NFS. Only mplayer on my desktop computer had problems.

No special settings on my server:

Code: Select all

/home/storage 192.168.1.0/24(rw,async,root_squash,no_subtree_check)
Same as the ones you mentioned in your post above.

How are your units connected with each other? Have you tried temporarily connecting the TViX directly to your B3, or change what ever hardware there might be between the two?

/Johan
I've tried with samba now, and that actually works great. This is weird, since NFS "should" have lower overhead, at least based on comments I've seen in other forums.
AzP
Posts: 60
Joined: 04 Mar 2011, 08:09

Re: Better performance for DLNA than NFS on B3

Post by AzP »

AzP wrote:
Gordon wrote:Could this be of interest?

Code: Select all

 NFS servers

Ensure that your NFS server is running in 'async' mode (configured in /etc/exports). The default for many NFS servers is 'async', but recent versions of debian now default to 'sync', which can result in very low throughput and the dreaded "TFW, Error: Write() -- IOBOUND" errors. Example of setting async in /etc/exports:

/mnt/store      192.168.1.3/32(rw,async,udp)
As you can see in my second post, I'm already running with the async flag on. But I will test with the UDP flag though, I thought that was on the client side, but if it works on server side it's great.
Sadly I was right, the mount options are "client side", and I am unable to edit the client since the TVix just mounts it and it doesn't even say what options it's using.

These are the settings that are automatically set on my desktop computer (running Gentoo Linux), without actually specifying anything more than default nfs settings in fstab:

Code: Select all

b3:/home/peter/torrents /mnt/torrents nfs rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,vers=3,rsize=65536,wsize=65536,namlen=255,hard,proto=tcp,timeo=600,retrans=2,sec=sys,mountaddr=192.168.0.2,mountvers=3,mountport=53281,mountproto=udp,local_lock=none,addr=192.168.0.2 0 0
b3:/home/peter/ /mnt/b3home nfs rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,vers=3,rsize=65536,wsize=65536,namlen=255,hard,proto=tcp,timeo=600,retrans=2,sec=sys,mountaddr=192.168.0.2,mountvers=3,mountport=53281,mountproto=udp,local_lock=none,addr=192.168.0.2 0 0
It's too bad I can't check the nfs mount settings on the TVix. I assume you can't ssh into it...
Binkem
Posts: 388
Joined: 10 Jul 2008, 02:26

Re: Better performance for DLNA than NFS on B3

Post by Binkem »

You might be able to ssh into it. I've got an ACRyan HD mini and it accepts connections via Ssh.
Try googling for it.
AzP
Posts: 60
Joined: 04 Mar 2011, 08:09

Re: Better performance for DLNA than NFS on B3

Post by AzP »

Binkem wrote:You might be able to ssh into it. I've got an ACRyan HD mini and it accepts connections via Ssh.
Try googling for it.
Yeah, I did after writing the post, and no luck...
johannes
Posts: 1470
Joined: 31 Dec 2006, 07:12
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Re: Better performance for DLNA than NFS on B3

Post by johannes »

Not sure if it helps, but have a look here.
/Johannes (Excito co-founder a long time ago, but now I'm just Johannes)
AzP
Posts: 60
Joined: 04 Mar 2011, 08:09

Re: Better performance for DLNA than NFS on B3

Post by AzP »

Thanks Johannes, that definitely seems to be the same issue that I have! It also means that I can't fix it, since it's a client side issue (just like we thought...). That means I have to get in touch with TViX, which in general seems to have horrible support.

I'll work on it, thanks for the info!
Post Reply