Synology Network Performance

Discussion in 'Mac Accessories' started by ixxx69, Feb 10, 2015.

  1. ixxx69 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Location:
    United States
    #1
    I've purchased a couple of Synology units for use in my Windows PC workplace, and they work great, and I'm a big fan. About a year ago, I decided to get a DS214Play for home usage. I returned it a couple weeks later.

    The problem was, network performance was all over the place. Wired via 1Gb ethernet, speeds would sometimes be around ~100MB/s, and other times, with certain files, it would slow down to 1MB/s. IIRC, it seemed to do this especially with DMGs, ISOs, Zip files, etc., but I don't remember exactly. I just remember that some seemingly random 200MB file would literally take several minutes to transfer, rather than several seconds.

    So, have the network transfer speeds gotten any better with Yosemite? Is this a fixable issue? Is there a better NAS out there specifically for my Mac-only household? Is this an Apple problem, and they simple don't care?

    I've been temporarily using my MBA as a "server" for a bunch of external hard drives, and it works pretty well, but I want my laptop back, and I'd really like to clean up the mess of cords of having 4 separate external drives attached. I've considered buying a Mac Mini and getting a 4-bay enclosure - that adds a few hundred dollars to the price, but is that the only solution for a more consistent network performance?
     
  2. ColdCase macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Location:
    NH
    #2

    Yes

    I found most low end NAS products are agonizing slow. By the time you find one with decent performance (If thats what you need), you are close to a mini server in price. NAS is most useful for file share only applications, IMHO. My low end mini server provides at least 2x data rates as my mid end synology NAS, and much better latency.
     
  3. ActionableMango macrumors 604

    ActionableMango

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2010
    #3
    I went the Mac Mini route. The advantages are overwhelming. I wrote a long post about it here.
     
  4. paulrbeers macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    #4
    To be honest, I've never understood why people want NAS's at all....

    A Base Mini $500 + $100 USB 3.0 Enclosure will get you a machine that doesn't use much more power than a NAS AND IS A FULL COMPUTER. That means it has a modern CPU able to do ANYTHING.

    Want to run FULL iTUNES? Yep it can do that!
    Want to run a Plex Server that can actually transcode video? Yep it can do that!
    Want to run OSX Server? Drop $20 and it can do that too!
    Want to add 4 more drives? Just add another $100 enclosure!

    Mini + DAS is so much more flexible. With Thunderbolt you can even 10gb ethernet if you really wanted to.
     
  5. ixxx69 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Location:
    United States
    #5
    Yes, there are some advantages to a Mac+DAS setup, not to mention Macs retain their value much better than a NAS... but it's not quite as compact/no fuss as the Synology units, and I really don't need all the features, and the cost really adds up.

    I won't buy a computer without an SSD, and I'd want the latest MM to get all the latest tech (wireless AC, etc.), and I buy Macs so I don't have to fiddle with them, so opening one up to install my own SSD is out of the question. The cheapest with an SSD will set me back around ~$870.

    4-bay DAS devices seem to get very mixed reviews or seem plagued with issues. Always hard to know when there are only a few reviews. So, recommendations for 4-bay DAS devices? I'd like to use it as JBOD without any special software.

    Nobody using the Synology units with their Macs? Did I post in the wrong forum? ;) (Synology Mac forums are pretty dead).
     
  6. blueroom macrumors 603

    blueroom

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    #6
    I've got a DS214play, no issues with it. Runs exactly as I'd expect a LAMP server. I'm running a 2013 rMBP 15" via AirPort Extreme and it's pretty snappy on file transfer but GigE is even faster.

    What router make model are you using, GigE adapter?
     
  7. paulrbeers macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    #7
    Why would you buy an SSD for something you only directly interact with when you need to update? A server is generally left alone for days/weeks/months. Seems like a waste. Outside of restarts for system updates, the SSD would go virtually unused and sit idle.....
     
  8. ixxx69 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Location:
    United States
    #8
    Good to hear it's working for you! So, you never notice certain large files take forever to transfer? This is a widely reported issue. I read reports that it's the way OS X handles SMB. And the Synology doesn't do AFP very well, I guess. Did you change any special network settings?

    I have an Airport Extreme 5th Gen. (which I'm planning on replacing with a 6th gen, depending on what route I go with this NAS setup). There's no problem with my network. It was specifically certain files or folders, and it was generally reproducible.

    Because when I do need to interact with it, I simply have no patience for it anymore. I'll also end up screen sharing quite a bit when moving large files between drives or performing CCC backups (which you pretty much have to do, otherwise the data has to make a round trip). And it will host a BR drive and do MakeMKV, Subler, and occasional HB jobs, etc.
     
  9. ColdCase macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Location:
    NH
    #9
    I have both, and my mini is more compact and much much less fuss than my synology when the mini had 4TB attached. Now that I have 10 drives (50TB) attached to it is a different. It was nice just adding storage without much fuss. I did have to decide what to name the volumes.

    You seem to be willing to spend hours and days futzing with a NAS and still won't be happy instead of the 30 minutes to swap a SSD into one of the mini bays or to plug in an enclosure equipped with a SSD and boot from it. Buts that just may be you :)
     
  10. paulrbeers macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    #10
    I'm still confused.... I thought you were asking about a NAS? We are giving you alternatives to a NAS. None of those can even be done from a NAS, so why are you concerned about it from the standpoint of using a Mini as a glorified NAS? You should only be configuring your Mini and doing the initial setup of applications and then leaving it alone just like you would a NAS. Why are you now interacting with it to do HB, Subler, etc....

    EDIT: And you if you are using the Mini as a NAS then Screen Sharing shouldn't even be an issue and moving files can be done from any client by accessing the Mini as network fileserver. As for CCC, I assume it has a scheduler just like SuperDuper! does (which is what I use). I never have to access my servers to do a backup, it just does it for me every Monday night at 10:30PM.
     
  11. ixxx69 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Location:
    United States
    #11
    That's a good point on the Synology - it does require some initial futzing to get everything setup right, though it's very low maintenance after that. But I don't want to get hung up on the MM/SSD or how it compares to a Synology... I'm already familiar with both.

    I actually only asked about the erratic transfer speed of the Synology (and taking that into consideration, whether a Mac is the best bet for consistent transfer speeds). When no one was able to address the Synology specifically, and the replies were essentially about the Mac Mini, I went along with that and asked for recommendations for a 4-bay HDD enclosure. No one has offered any recommendations yet.

    I can’t force people to address the questions I asked, so I tried to be a good sport and address the questions that were asked of me. As is often the case, that just leads to more questions and tangents... and we just get further away from why I posted in the first place.

    I appreciate the time people take contribute to this lowly thread anyway. Thanks!
     
  12. ColdCase macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Location:
    NH
    #12
    There are a number of 4 bay enclosure discussions. I use the OWC thunderbay, and software RAID where want RAID for performance. There are many happy thunderbay campers. You may be able to catch a thunderbay 1 on clearance.
     
  13. ixxx69 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Location:
    United States
    #13
    Thanks for the heads up! I'll also do some searching around the forums - I'm sure there's plenty of good info.
     

Share This Page