Dumb NAS question

[robmarch]

This is probably a dumb question, but I haven't uncovered the answer in my searching. If you store sagetv recordings to a NAS device, does an extender stream the files directly from the NAS (one network stream) or does the sage server stream the files from the NAS and buffer them so that the extender can stream them from the server (two network streams?)

hope this makes sense, I'm wondering if using a NAS will double required network bandwidth, or if the extenders can stream directly if the server is not transcoding.


Thanks

[gplasky]

Everything for extenders go thru the server.

Gerry

[Beefcake550]

Correct.. the latter is true.

[robmarch]

Originally Posted by gplasky

Everything for extenders go thru the server.

Gerry

ok, thanks. I thought that was the case, but wanted to confirm. This seems like a pretty big downer for leveraging a NAS device to stream multiple simultaneous video streams.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by robmarch

ok, thanks. I thought that was the case, but wanted to confirm. This seems like a pretty big downer for leveraging a NAS device to stream multiple simultaneous video streams.

Another advantage of using WHS for storage and Sage...

[robmarch]

Originally Posted by S_M_E

Another advantage of using WHS for storage and Sage...

I'm not even sure what distinction you're thinking of here, unfortunately.

that os manages NAS better?

I'll probably just add a bigger drive to my server pc, I don't need a ton of storage.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by robmarch

I'm not even sure what distinction you're thinking of here, unfortunately.

that os manages NAS better?

I'll probably just add a bigger drive to my server pc, I don't need a ton of storage.

One benefit of using WHS for Sage is that WHS replaces the need for a NAS, it handles the storage itself and therefore you don't have issues streaming from WHS because it's both the Sage server AND the NAS.

[sandor]

Originally Posted by S_M_E

One benefit of using WHS for Sage is that WHS replaces the need for a NAS, it handles the storage itself and therefore you don't have issues streaming from WHS because it's both the Sage server AND the NAS.

then on the flip side, you lose one of the benefits of a NAS-that is is solely responsible for holding and serving files.

as soon as you load other software on your server, you will naturally decrease the stability.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by sandor

then on the flip side, you lose one of the benefits of a NAS-that is is solely responsible for holding and serving files.

I consider that a benefit. My WHS IS my NAS, I don't need two machines.

as soon as you load other software on your server, you will naturally decrease the stability.

I've found my WHS to be very stable, even with added SW.

[sandor]

Originally Posted by S_M_E

I consider that a benefit. My WHS IS my NAS, I don't need two machines.


I've found my WHS to be very stable, even with added SW.

No problem.

I've found that the server machine that i use to incessantly tinker with SageTV needs rebooting exponentially more than my NAS, which i haven't rebooted in over a year.

But then, in addition to basic SageTV usage, my NAS also serves as the backup space for all the laptops and the server as well as WAN access and all my file storage. So i don't want my tinkering to interfere with that data.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by sandor

I've found that the server machine that i use to incessantly tinker with SageTV needs rebooting exponentially more than my NAS, which i haven't rebooted in over a year.

But then, in addition to basic SageTV usage, my NAS also serves as the backup space for all the laptops and the server as well as WAN access and all my file storage. So i don't want my tinkering to interfere with that data.

I usually reboot my WHS+Sage server once a month due to updates not due to instability. My WHS is also my backup solution and it allows for remote access. My WHS does everything, so far, that you said your NAS does and more except I do it all on one box and I didn't have to pay 330-500 more for a 4 drive backplane.

[GKusnick]

Originally Posted by robmarch

I'm wondering if using a NAS will double required network bandwidth...

It adds an extra hop, but why should that double the required bandwidth? It's still just one outbound stream from the NAS and one inbound to the client. You have two streams at the server, but they're headed in opposite directions (inbound and outbound) so with proper full-duplexing they shouldn't interfere. So you haven't actually doubled up the traffic on any given leg; you've just added more legs to the path.

[Beefcake550]

it's twice if it's on the same network. THe same packet travels from the ANS to the server and from the server to the client.

I agree with S_M_E - dump the "NAS" and make WHS your NAS....that's the point of WHS

[sandor]

Originally Posted by S_M_E

My WHS does everything, so far, that you said your NAS does and more except I do it all on one box and I didn't have to pay 330-500 more for a 4 drive backplane.

So do you use your WHS for all your home computing as well? Interneting? Youtubing? Huluing? etc? Yeah, i have my laptop for work, sage setup for dicking around and television and my NASLite box for storage.


For my NAS I actually put into use a retired P4, got a $30 8 port hardware RAID card off ebay, and threw NASLite on for $30.

So apart from the drives it cost me $60 total, and i have a RAID 5 with hot spare. And a bulletproof linux-based NAS appliance that has been running so long i don't even think about it anymore.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by sandor

So do you use your WHS for all your home computing as well? Interneting? Youtubing? Huluing? etc? Yeah, i have my laptop for work, sage setup for dicking around and television and my NASLite box for storage.

I don't hulu or netflix at all but I have workstations (like you have laptops) for desktop use. However my Sage Server runs happily on WHS and I don't need separate machines for storage and Sage.

For my NAS I actually put into use a retired P4, got a $30 8 port hardware RAID card off ebay, and threw NASLite on for $30.

So apart from the drives it cost me $60 total, and i have a RAID 5 with hot spare. And a bulletproof linux-based NAS appliance that has been running so long i don't even think about it anymore.

Yeah but you're still stuck with linux on top of needing two machines too. You use what ever floats your boat.

Too funny...

[GKusnick]

Originally Posted by Beefcake550

it's twice if it's on the same network. THe same packet travels from the ANS to the server and from the server to the client.

But the point is that it travels over different physical wires. Ethernet is a star topology; each node has its own connection to the switch, whose function to sort things out so that traffic on one wire doesn't interfere with traffic on a different wire. If node A sends a packet to node B at the same time as B is sending one to C, the two packets should not collide if the switch is doing its job properly.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by GKusnick

But the point is that it travels over different physical wires. Ethernet is a star topology; each node has its own connection to the switch, whose function to sort things out so that traffic on one wire doesn't interfere with traffic on a different wire. If node A sends a packet to node B at the same time as B is sending one to C, the two packets should not collide if the switch is doing its job properly.

I agree, it's just another routing hop but if the storage and Sage server are on the same machine (like with WHS) then that's one less hop and less authentication traffic too.

[Beefcake550]

In a perfect world, this is correct. In a good, expensive router, the router with N ports would have N*(port speed) internet switching capacity or more. Unfortunately, I doubt this is true. Granted, I've never tested it, but this is my assumption.

[robmarch]

Originally Posted by Beefcake550

In a perfect world, this is correct. In a good, expensive router, the router with N ports would have N*(port speed) internet switching capacity or more. Unfortunately, I doubt this is true. Granted, I've never tested it, but this is my assumption.

I guess I was thinking more about the single pipe between the server and the router. down from the NAS and up to the client need to share a pipe, unless I'm thinking about things wrong.

thanks for the discussions

I'm currently running sage on windows xp on an old pc with local hard drives.

[GKusnick]

Originally Posted by robmarch

I guess I was thinking more about the single pipe between the server and the router. down from the NAS and up to the client need to share a pipe, unless I'm thinking about things wrong.

That "single pipe" consists of four twisted pairs. Inbound and outbound traffic travel on separate pairs. Asuuming your NIC handles full duplex properly, there's no reason it can't transmit and receive simultaneously.