Support NeoGAF

[captive]

Yeah, I'm good with the hardware I've selected and bought. I just rarely see Storage Spaces suggested in this thread so I wanted to be sure there were no severe draw backs if my main use is movies through Plex and some backing up from other computers for my familys' photos (have a cloud backup of photos also). I didn't want to commit to Windows 8.1 and then regret it later. Thanks!

Unless I misunderstand your first post, you can't setup a virtual disk with parity in storage spaces with one hard drive.

If you meant just one virtual disk, on multiple drives, nm.

Also when you set it up, if you go that route, the only gotcha I found was if you create a virtual disk in storage spaces with say four disks, and you run out of room, to expand the virtual disk later you'll need an additional 4 drives.

 

[Rur0ni]

As I understand it, Storage Spaces cannot properly rebalance as drives are added without doing a manual copy. Also it's slow as well.

It's really simple though. Those two reasons are probably the only reason I'm not on it right now (as I recall, been a couple years).

 

[TarpitCarnivore]

Hmm, maybe I'm misunderstanding but it feels like you answer my last question in the case of the PC/NAS idea I was talking about one paragraph earlier, while all I meant is : can I buy a Syno and an HD, use it as is because oh boy the prices add up, and some month later add another hd and then tell the Nas to copy the content of the old hd to the new and set the thing in raid1.
Then again maybe you perfectly answered me and I'm in over my head.

Yes you can, but I wouldn't use RAID 1 if you do that. You can't just easily switch between RAID versions and RAID doesn't support mixed drive sizes. If you really want a Synology and plan to add drives as you go you're best bet will be to use SHR.

I think you should really consider going for a 4 bay model. As I said earlier it's better to buy for the future than to buy for now.

 

[captive]

As I understand it, Storage Spaces cannot properly rebalance as drives are added without doing a manual copy. Also it's slow as well.

It's really simple though. Those two reasons are probably the only reason I'm not on it right now (as I recall, been a couple years).

It can properly rebalance, but you have to add an equal amount of disks. So when I created my storage pool on my new server, I started with 3 3tb disks, which is the smallest amount of disks you can start with if you want parity virtual disks. Now my virtual disks span all 12 hdds.

 

[B-B-Bomba!]

Since we're talking about RAIDs and that, I'd love someone's take on my plan ...

I'm looking to buy a 2-bay synology NAS and a single 3tb drive. My intention is to back this up myself every month or so to a 3tb USB drive which I already own.

Is there anything obviously wrong or misguided in this plan? I know very little about RAID but remember reading it was a bit unnecessary in such a small setup.

 

[Valkyr Junkie]

Why monthly backups as opposed to nightly or even more frequent? That's really the only problem with that setup; there is a very realistic chance that at some point you will lose up to a month's worth of data.

 

[crazygambit]

It can properly rebalance, but you have to add an equal amount of disks. So when I created my storage pool on my new server, I started with 3 3tb disks, which is the smallest amount of disks you can start with if you want parity virtual disks. Now my virtual disks span all 12 hdds.

Do they all have to be the same size? I noticed all your disks were 3TB.

That's a deal breaker for me. I currently have a system with 4 4TB, 3 3TB, 4 2TB and a few 1 TB and 500 GB disks (I think I even have a 320 GB one in there somewhere). Being able to buy disks as your needs increase and at a decent price per GB is a major win in such a system. If I had bought all 20 disks at 2TB (the maximum available at the time I built the system) it would have been a huuuuge expense and I'd have less storage than I do today. Today it doesn't make sense to buy a 2TB disk IMO so I would either have to throw away all the disks I already have and buy all new 3 or 4TB disks or keep buying inefficient 2TB disks. In the long term with a high disk capacity system I feel not being able to mix and match is just unworkable.

Once I feel every slot, if I still need more space I just take out the 320GB disk and replace it with a higher capacity one and rebuild it.

There are some systems when you can mix and match but only get the capacity of the smaller disk, so essentially I'd have a bunch of 320GB disk (even though I paid for 4TB ones) that's of course almost as bad as not being able to mix and match.

So besides unraid, which other systems let you mix and match disk (and get the full capacity from them)?

 

[TarpitCarnivore]

Since we're talking about RAIDs and that, I'd love someone's take on my plan ...

I'm looking to buy a 2-bay synology NAS and a single 3tb drive. My intention is to back this up myself every month or so to a 3tb USB drive which I already own.

Is there anything obviously wrong or misguided in this plan? I know very little about RAID but remember reading it was a bit unnecessary in such a small setup.

I would recommend using Backblaze/Crashplan in place of the 3TB USB drive.

 

[Marty Chinn]

So besides unraid, which other systems let you mix and match disk (and get the full capacity from them)?

Synology sort of lets you mix and match disks when you use their SHR partition. There are two caveats though. The first is when you expand, you can only add in a drive that is equal or larger than the largest single drive currently in the pool. The second is you need at two drives of the same size for the largest capacity in order to reach full potential. If you don't, you'll have unused space until you match the drive size. This is because of how it handles data redundancy for drive failure.

So in your case, I did a quick calculation and 4 4TB drives, 3 3TB drivese, 4 2TB drives, and 1 1TB drive would result in 30TB of usable space and 4TB of redunancy. All the drive space is being used with this drive configuration.

 

[JeffGames-24]

.

 

[captive]

Do they all have to be the same size? I noticed all your disks were 3TB.

That's a deal breaker for me. I currently have a system with 4 4TB, 3 3TB, 4 2TB and a few 1 TB and 500 GB disks (I think I even have a 320 GB one in there somewhere). Being able to buy disks as your needs increase and at a decent price per GB is a major win in such a system. If I had bought all 20 disks at 2TB (the maximum available at the time I built the system) it would have been a huuuuge expense and I'd have less storage than I do today. Today it doesn't make sense to buy a 2TB disk IMO so I would either have to throw away all the disks I already have and buy all new 3 or 4TB disks or keep buying inefficient 2TB disks. In the long term with a high disk capacity system I feel not being able to mix and match is just unworkable.

Once I feel every slot, if I still need more space I just take out the 320GB disk and replace it with a higher capacity one and rebuild it.

There are some systems when you can mix and match but only get the capacity of the smaller disk, so essentially I'd have a bunch of 320GB disk (even though I paid for 4TB ones) that's of course almost as bad as not being able to mix and match.

So besides unraid, which other systems let you mix and match disk (and get the full capacity from them)?

No they don't have to be the same size, that's the beauty of Storage Pools in Windows 8/Server 2012. I just happened to have 8 3tb drives and so I bought 4 more for a full 12.

 

[darkazcura]

Unless I misunderstand your first post, you can't setup a virtual disk with parity in storage spaces with one hard drive.

If you meant just one virtual disk, on multiple drives, nm.

Also when you set it up, if you go that route, the only gotcha I found was if you create a virtual disk in storage spaces with say four disks, and you run out of room, to expand the virtual disk later you'll need an additional 4 drives.

Yeah, I meant multiple disks. When I said one disk in parity, I was trying to clarify that I'm not doing a two disk parity solution. I've bought three 3 TB hard drives. I'm planning on buying two more 3 TB hard drives before I setup my pool. So if I ever want to expand this, I'd have to buy 5 more drives? Interesting. Definitely a bit of a downer, but I'm not sure if there are really any better options out there for what I want to do (Plex + PlexConnect and server all in one computer).

I mean I've thought about simply setting up FreeNAS or some similar software with the new hard drives/computer and just use my old media server (which currently doubles as a file storage and Plex comp) as the exclusive Plex server. That would mean having two computers on at all times, though, which is something I'd like to avoid.

 

[captive]

Yeah, I meant multiple disks. When I said one disk in parity, I was trying to clarify that I'm not doing a two disk parity solution. I've bought three 3 TB hard drives. I'm planning on buying two more 3 TB hard drives before I setup my pool. So if I ever want to expand this, I'd have to buy 5 more drives? Interesting. Definitely a bit of a downer, but I'm not sure if there are really any better options out there for what I want to do (Plex + PlexConnect and server all in one computer).

I mean I've thought about simply setting up FreeNAS or some similar software with the new hard drives/computer and just use my old media server (which currently doubles as a file storage and Plex comp) as the exclusive Plex server. That would mean having two computers on at all times, though, which is something I'd like to avoid.

Just start with the 3 drives you have, create your virtual disk in parity mode, then when you want to expand you only need 3 more drives to expand.
It kind of sucks, but there's drawbacks to all the solutions out there. With FreeNAS you are limited to the size of the smallest drive if you have multiple hard drives of different size.

That said its plenty fast to stream. I rip all my blu-rays with MKV and stream from my office to our TV room with XBMC over a homeplug and I have zero skipping or stutters. Plex should be lighter on your network than XBMC, but you need more processor power to do the transcoding.

 

[darkazcura]

Just start with the 3 drives you have, create your virtual disk in parity mode, then when you want to expand you only need 3 more drives to expand.
It kind of sucks, but there's drawbacks to all the solutions out there. With FreeNAS you are limited to the size of the smallest drive if you have multiple hard drives of different size.

That said its plenty fast to stream. I rip all my blu-rays with MKV and stream from my office to our TV room with XBMC over a homeplug and I have zero skipping or stutters. Plex should be lighter on your network than XBMC, but you need more processor power to do the transcoding.

XBMC was the way I originally wanted to handle this because I'm a sucker for great video quality, but my house is not wired for ethernet. I should try that HomePlug stuff, but I'd need a set box with XBMC installed. I haven't really felt like spending that kind of money to figure out whether it will work or not, and I've surprisingly been happy with the quality of my transcoded movies through Plex.

I would consider starting with 3, but my server box can't fit more than 5 comfortably. Ehhhh, I'll look into it. Maybe I should go to 6. Thanks!

This would be a waste of money, but I'm just wondering, if 2-3 years down the road, I wanted to slowly replace my 3 TB drives out for say, 6 TB drives, could I replace the drives one at a time as I buy them or is literally the only way I can add space by adding double the amount of drives like you outlined?

 

[TarpitCarnivore]

XBMC was the way I originally wanted to handle this because I'm a sucker for great video quality, but my house is not wired for ethernet. I should try that HomePlug stuff, but I'd need a set box with XBMC installed. I haven't really felt like spending that kind of money to figure out whether it will work or not, and I've surprisingly been happy with the quality of my transcoded movies through Plex.

I would consider starting with 3, but my server box can't fit more than 5 comfortably. Ehhhh, I'll look into it. Maybe I should go to 6. Thanks!

This would be a waste of money, but I'm just wondering, if 2-3 years down the road, I wanted to slowly replace my 3 TB drives out for say, 6 TB drives, could I replace the drives one at a time as I buy them or is literally the only way I can add space by adding double the amount of drives like you outlined?

Powerline adapters are OK at best, but once you start crossing circuits they get pretty spotty. I use MoCA adapters in my house because the Fios router supports it. I consistently hit 100mbps on them and that is plenty.

As for XBMC and playing movies you wont need much network speed. I stream to my Roku boxes via Plex over Wifi and they work just fine.

 

[Valkyr Junkie]

XBMC was the way I originally wanted to handle this because I'm a sucker for great video quality, but my house is not wired for ethernet. I should try that HomePlug stuff, but I'd need a set box with XBMC installed. I haven't really felt like spending that kind of money to figure out whether it will work or not, and I've surprisingly been happy with the quality of my transcoded movies through Plex.

With the native playback abilities of Kodi/XBMC, WiFi should be more than fast enough for you. What bitrate are you transcoding video at with Plex?

 

[captive]

XBMC was the way I originally wanted to handle this because I'm a sucker for great video quality, but my house is not wired for ethernet. I should try that HomePlug stuff, but I'd need a set box with XBMC installed. I haven't really felt like spending that kind of money to figure out whether it will work or not, and I've surprisingly been happy with the quality of my transcoded movies through Plex.

I would consider starting with 3, but my server box can't fit more than 5 comfortably. Ehhhh, I'll look into it. Maybe I should go to 6. Thanks!

This would be a waste of money, but I'm just wondering, if 2-3 years down the road, I wanted to slowly replace my 3 TB drives out for say, 6 TB drives, could I replace the drives one at a time as I buy them or is literally the only way I can add space by adding double the amount of drives like you outlined?

yes, you can replace them one at a time.

With the native playback abilities of Kodi/XBMC, WiFi should be more than fast enough for you. What bitrate are you transcoding video at with Plex?

I would recommend against WiFi unless you're going through only one wall. In my setup there are a bunch of walls in between the setup. And the there is interference. I've lived in 3 different houses with 3 different microwaves, and in every house I can kill music streaming instantly just by turning on the microwave, regardless of its position in the house. And streaming music is not even a 10th as demanding as streaming a blu-ray.

 

[darkazcura]

With the native playback abilities of Kodi/XBMC, WiFi should be more than fast enough for you. What bitrate are you transcoding video at with Plex?

Can't transcode past 10 or 12 mbps (i5 2500k processer..I think I'm limited by my network here..or the Roku/Apple TV). I have a N900 router but a couple walls and ~40 feet to cover (router > media box distance). The only time I have been able to stream my full bitrate (much higher than 10-12 mbps) blu-rays uncompressed was when I had a NFS share setup on my Win7 PC and a Boxee Box reading that NFS share over 2.4 GHz no less! I didn't even need the raised throughput possible with 5GHz, and I was able to stream it across the house. I was always amazed by that.. I haven't been able to replicate that setup with any modern set-top box, which I admit is weird. All of my laptops lag when I try to watch one of the files on it. That Boxee Box was really underrated honestly...

Ever since I switched to AppleTV and Roku I've kinda just settled with Plex because I haven't been able to get my blu-rays streaming over WiFi with XBMC like I could with my Boxee/NFS share. Kinda think wireless AC may solve my issues with this, but the hardware upgrade would be fairly expensive.

Powerline adapters are OK at best, but once you start crossing circuits they get pretty spotty. I use MoCA adapters in my house because the Fios router supports it. I consistently hit 100mbps on them and that is plenty.

As for XBMC and playing movies you wont need much network speed. I stream to my Roku boxes via Plex over Wifi and they work just fine.

Well I assume you are transcoding like I am right now? I can watch my movies on the Roku and Apple TV with Plex just fine over WiFi at pretty good quality (12 mbps), but it's not the full file/bit-rate. Or do you not transcode? What kind of hardware are you all using (router, media box, etc) if you can stream full blu-ray rips over WiFi? Like I said I've only been able to do that with the Boxee Box and a NFS share so I know it's possible. I just haven't had luck doing it with more modern boxes..

 

[captive]

Can't transcode past 10 or 12 mbps (i5 2500k processer..I think I'm limited by my network here..or the Roku/Apple TV). I have a N900 router but a couple walls and ~40 feet to cover (router > media box distance). The only time I have been able to stream my full bitrate (much higher than 10-12 mbps) blu-rays uncompressed was when I had a NFS share setup on my Win7 PC and a Boxee Box reading that NFS share over 2.4 GHz no less! I didn't even need the raised throughput possible with 5GHz, and I was able to stream it across the house. I was always amazed by that.. I haven't been able to replicate that setup with any modern set-top box, which I admit is weird. All of my laptops lag when I try to watch one of the files on it. That Boxee Box was really underrated honestly...

Ever since I switched to AppleTV and Roku I've kinda just settled with Plex because I haven't been able to get my blu-rays streaming over WiFi with XBMC like I could with my Boxee/NFS share. Kinda think wireless AC may solve my issues with this, but the hardware upgrade would be fairly expensive.



Well I assume you are transcoding like I am right now? I can watch my movies on the Roku and Apple TV with Plex just fine over WiFi at pretty good quality (12 mbps), but it's not the full file/bit-rate. Or do you not transcode? What kind of hardware are you all using (router, media box, etc) if you can stream full blu-ray rips over WiFi? Like I said I've only been able to do that with the Boxee Box and a NFS share so I know it's possible. I just haven't had luck doing it with more modern boxes..

First of all, XBMC does not transcode, it decodes for playback.
Secondly, I have a core I3 3240 and it decodes blu-rays fine. I tried an appletv 2 like you did and it sucked a big fat one, didn't bother with plex because I want the best quality available. The issues you may have been experiencing might be network related. But it might be XBMC related. They changed something in XBMC from 12 to 13 because over the same homeplug with the same setup I was unable to play movies without massive stuttering, in XBMC 12. Now on Kodi 14.2 it plays like the file was sitting on a drive inside the pc itself.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Well I assume you are transcoding like I am right now? I can watch my movies on the Roku and Apple TV with Plex just fine over WiFi at pretty good quality (12 mbps), but it's not the full file/bit-rate. Or do you not transcode? What kind of hardware are you all using (router, media box, etc) if you can stream full blu-ray rips over WiFi? Like I said I've only been able to do that with the Boxee Box and a NFS share so I know it's possible. I just haven't had luck doing it with more modern boxes..

I'm able to stream full Blu-Ray rips without transcoding over WiFi. I've got a Synology NAS wired to a Netgear Nighthawk R7000 on the first floor of our house and streaming to a Fire TV running XBMC upstairs. It seems to work just fine.

 

[darkazcura]

First of all, XBMC does not transcode, it decodes for playback.
Secondly, I have a core I3 3240 and it decodes blu-rays fine. I tried an appletv 2 like you did and it sucked a big fat one, didn't bother with plex because I want the best quality available. The issues you may have been experiencing might be network related. But it might be XBMC related. They changed something in XBMC from 12 to 13 because over the same homeplug with the same setup I was unable to play movies without massive stuttering, in XBMC 12. Now on Kodi 14.2 it plays like the file was sitting on a drive inside the pc itself.

I don't think you like my style of writing because I never said XBMC transcodes. =P I'm not sure where that was ever inferred in my post, but it's alright. Trust me, I know XBMC doesn't transcode, haha I thought that was clear when I said I moved to Plex because I was unable to stream full blu ray rips via XBMC liked I used to with my Boxee. I guess I should be more clear. Anyway maybe I should give Kodi a shake then.

I'm able to stream full Blu-Ray rips without transcoding over WiFi. I've got a Synology NAS wired to a Netgear Nighthawk R7000 on the first floor of our house and streaming to a Fire TV running XBMC upstairs. It seems to work just fine.

Interesting. Is the Fire TV the best and cheapest option for getting XBMC/Kodi? Maybe I should pick one up and try it out with my current router..

 

[Marty Chinn]

Interesting. Is the Fire TV the best and cheapest option for getting XBMC/Kodi? Maybe I should pick one up and try it out with my current router..

I think it's the best box under $100 for XBMC/Kodi. Cheapest is probably a Fire TV Stick or Raspberry Pi maybe. It was good enough that I replaced my powerful HTPC with it in my main room and bought two more to put in other rooms in the house. It also did things my HTPC couldn't.

What I like about it is:

1) Great and very stable performance. The GUI in XBMC runs at 60fps.

2) You can run any Android app on it which opens up a lot of functionality and potential.

3) It's the only box I know of where you can completely integrate Netflix, HBO Go, Hulu, Amazon Instant Watch, Disney Channel, Disney Junior, Disney XD, ESPN, Showtime, and so forth directly into XBMC/Kodi so that it's seamless. I could never do this on my HTPC.

4) Low powered

5) Bluetooth remote means no need for line of sight

6) Cheap

There are some caveats though.

1) It doesn't support 24p output. That's not so much of a big deal to me since my TV automatically compensates for this and converts the feed to 24p. Also, a lot of the sources I watch anyway aren't formatted for 24p outside of my Blu Ray rips. But for some, that's a deal killer.

2) 10-bit encoded videos won't work on it since they are very processor intensive and not hardware supported. Many PCs won't handle this either and it's probably unreasonable to expect a $100 or less box to work with it for now. These are mostly done for anime.

3) HD Audio formats aren't supported (DTS-HD MA, Dolby True HD)

So if you can live with the caveats, it's a great box for XBMC. It's even better when you can root it. If you live in the US there's still a chance you can pick up one that is rootable and there's a guide that will tell you how to spot one in a store.

 

[Pachimari]

So as I am running out of space on my Synology DS411j, I am looking to add another one. It's primarily for all of my media, and as someone who is very satisfied with the 411j, which one would you recommend? It have to be Synology as that's what I am familiar with.
Or should I just go with hard drives in an enclosure and not a network drive?

I have come down to these:

• Sans Digital TowerRAID TR4U+B 4 Bay SATA to USB 3.0 JBOD Enclosure with hard drives of my own choice.
• Or a Synology NAS.

 

[darkazcura]

I think it's the best box under $100 for XBMC/Kodi. Cheapest is probably a Fire TV Stick or Raspberry Pi maybe. It was good enough that I replaced my powerful HTPC with it in my main room and bought two more to put in other rooms in the house. It also did things my HTPC couldn't.

What I like about it is:

1) Great and very stable performance. The GUI in XBMC runs at 60fps.

2) You can run any Android app on it which opens up a lot of functionality and potential.

3) It's the only box I know of where you can completely integrate Netflix, HBO Go, Hulu, Amazon Instant Watch, Disney Channel, Disney Junior, Disney XD, ESPN, Showtime, and so forth directly into XBMC/Kodi so that it's seamless. I could never do this on my HTPC.

4) Low powered

5) Bluetooth remote means no need for line of sight

6) Cheap

There are some caveats though.

1) It doesn't support 24p output. That's not so much of a big deal to me since my TV automatically compensates for this and converts the feed to 24p. Also, a lot of the sources I watch anyway aren't formatted for 24p outside of my Blu Ray rips. But for some, that's a deal killer.

2) 10-bit encoded videos won't work on it since they are very processor intensive and not hardware supported. Many PCs won't handle this either and it's probably unreasonable to expect a $100 or less box to work with it for now. These are mostly done for anime.

3) HD Audio formats aren't supported (DTS-HD MA, Dolby True HD)

So if you can live with the caveats, it's a great box for XBMC. It's even better when you can root it. If you live in the US there's still a chance you can pick up one that is rootable and there's a guide that will tell you how to spot one in a store.

Hmm, everything sounds pretty good until the HD Audio part. I could potentially live with that, but I have a question about that. Does it downsample (I know this probably isn't the right term) the HD Audio track to at least 5.1? Do I at least get surround sound through it? Or will I need the "normal" Dolby Digital/DTS track for audio to come through? Basically what happens if the only audio tracks I have are the HD audio tracks (which is the case with a couple movies)?

EDIT: Actually I feel like when you rip the HD audio track, the "normal" track is typically ripped with it so maybe this is a moot point..I dunno.

Researching this last night, I've read good things about the Chromebox, but it seems like an XBMC only kinda thing, and I don't think that's worth it for ~$150. Having Netflix, Hulu, SlingTV, XBMC, etc is very appealing to me. That's why I like the Roku even though the interface kinda sucks (Plex instead of XBMC obviously). I have access to all my movies and all of the big apps. Only drawback with the FireTV is that Comcast blocks HBOGO on it. There's always one minor drawback, isn't there? =P

 

[Marty Chinn]

Hmm, everything sounds pretty good until the HD Audio part. I could potentially live with that, but I have a question about that. Does it downsample (I know this probably isn't the right term) the HD Audio track to at least 5.1? Do I at least get surround sound through it? Or will I need the "normal" Dolby Digital/DTS track for audio to come through? Basically what happens if the only audio tracks I have are the HD audio tracks (which is the case with a couple movies)?

Ya, right now I pop in a disc if you really want to have the HD audio track, so it's a bit of a compromise. I kinda let it slide since I have two young kids and don't raise the audio volume too high most of the time. Plus I focused more on getting the Disney stuff on the server for easier access and just key favorite movies for now. So it's not too bad, but ya, when I want uncompressed audio, I have to pop in a disc.

As for how it works, it really depends what the audio track is that comes with the Blu Ray. Fortunately most movies are DTS-HD MA which is backwards compatible to DTS so you don't have to do anything. Just rip it and it'll figure out which track to use. If it's Dolby True HD, then it comes with a separate track for the standard Dolby Digital 5.1. I believe it's in the spec that True HD has to include a regular track. I tend to rip all audio tracks so they're at my disposal and in the future or whenever I turn on the more powerful HTPC, it's available. Now if it's just a PCM only track, then you're kinda out of luck but even then I could have sworn any disc with a PCM track also had regular Dolby Digital or DTS at their disposal as an alternate track. Either way you should have options, but DTS-HD MA makes it the easiest.

Researching this last night, I've read good things about the Chromebox, but it seems like an XBMC only kinda thing, and I don't think that's worth it for ~$150. Having Netflix, Hulu, SlingTV, XBMC, etc is very appealing to me. That's why I like the Roku even though the interface kinda sucks (Plex instead of XBMC obviously). I have access to all my movies and all of the big apps. Only drawback with the FireTV is that Comcast blocks HBOGO on it. There's always one minor drawback, isn't there? =P

Ya, there's ALWAYS a drawback and you just have to figure out what is the least painful thing to do without. For me, as much as I want HD audio, that only applies to movies. For streaming and normal TV stuff, it's a non issue. So for me, every day usage I find having all the various services like Netflix, Amazon and HBO being integrated by far more useful. It's also way easier than it ever was before for the rest of the family to use since it's all integrated. I hear you on HBO though. For me it was Disney which was blocked by DirecTV. Fortunately, they finally opened that up. Hopefully HBO Now might let you bypass Comcast once the exclusivity is up.

Before, my HTPC was only for media stored on the server and Netflix sorta worked because of the Windows Media Center version being somewhat friendly to working. But nothing else did easily. As for the other services, forget about it. So to some, I'm sure it sounds surprising that I went away from a $1000 gaming HTPC and switched to a sub $100 Amazon Fire TV. So ya for me, easily going between everything that was remote friendly and easy for the rest of the family was a huge deciding factor. I still can do the other stuff, but since they are less frequently done, I just use either the HTPC or Blu Ray player when I want to do those less frequent tasks.

 

[TarpitCarnivore]

So as I am running out of space on my Synology DS411j, I am looking to add another one. It's primarily for all of my media, and as someone who is very satisfied with the 411j, which one would you recommend? It have to be Synology as that's what I am familiar with.
Or should I just go with hard drives in an enclosure and not a network drive?

I have come down to these:

• Sans Digital TowerRAID TR4U+B 4 Bay SATA to USB 3.0 JBOD Enclosure with hard drives of my own choice.
• Or a Synology NAS.

If it were me, I wouldn't run 4 drives without some kind of redundancy. JBOD is "just a bunch of disks" so if one fails you're kind of screwed.

 

[TarpitCarnivore]

Researching this last night, I've read good things about the Chromebox, but it seems like an XBMC only kinda thing, and I don't think that's worth it for ~$150. Having Netflix, Hulu, SlingTV, XBMC, etc is very appealing to me. That's why I like the Roku even though the interface kinda sucks (Plex instead of XBMC obviously). I have access to all my movies and all of the big apps. Only drawback with the FireTV is that Comcast blocks HBOGO on it. There's always one minor drawback, isn't there? =P

Plex has a new Roku channel in testing now with a design that brings it inline with the PS3/4 and Xbox apps. The only issue I've noticed with it so far is no "unwatched" category which is how I keep on top of newly added shows.

Comcast also blocks HBO GO period IIRC.

Well I assume you are transcoding like I am right now? I can watch my movies on the Roku and Apple TV with Plex just fine over WiFi at pretty good quality (12 mbps), but it's not the full file/bit-rate. Or do you not transcode? What kind of hardware are you all using (router, media box, etc) if you can stream full blu-ray rips over WiFi? Like I said I've only been able to do that with the Boxee Box and a NFS share so I know it's possible. I just haven't had luck doing it with more modern boxes..

I have a mix of MP4 and MKV files with various encoding. My Roku is set up for direct play if possible on the local network. My router is just an Actiontec from Fios running Wireless N.

 

[crazygambit]

If it were me, I wouldn't run 4 drives without some kind of redundancy. JBOD is "just a bunch of disks" so if one fails you're kind of screwed.

I agree. However, even more important than that is to have a cache drive IMO. It will significantly reduce the strain on the other HDDs on your system. The more you have the more important it is. I've had my unraid server for more than 6 years and I have yet to have a drive fail on me (surprisingly, not even the cache), simply because they're spun off most of the time.

 

[darkazcura]

Plex has a new Roku channel in testing now with a design that brings it inline with the PS3/4 and Xbox apps. The only issue I've noticed with it so far is no "unwatched" category which is how I keep on top of newly added shows.

Comcast also blocks HBO GO period IIRC.



I have a mix of MP4 and MKV files with various encoding. My Roku is set up for direct play if possible on the local network. My router is just an Actiontec from Fios running Wireless N.

You can use HBO GO with Comcast on the Apple TV, X360, and Roku. Pretty much always could with Apple TV and a while with the 360. The Roku was as recent as a few months ago.

Anyway yeah I noticed Plex is getting a redesign. Hopefully it will open up for free users soon.

Ya, right now I pop in a disc if you really want to have the HD audio track, so it's a bit of a compromise. I kinda let it slide since I have two young kids and don't raise the audio volume too high most of the time. Plus I focused more on getting the Disney stuff on the server for easier access and just key favorite movies for now. So it's not too bad, but ya, when I want uncompressed audio, I have to pop in a disc.

As for how it works, it really depends what the audio track is that comes with the Blu Ray. Fortunately most movies are DTS-HD MA which is backwards compatible to DTS so you don't have to do anything. Just rip it and it'll figure out which track to use. If it's Dolby True HD, then it comes with a separate track for the standard Dolby Digital 5.1. I believe it's in the spec that True HD has to include a regular track. I tend to rip all audio tracks so they're at my disposal and in the future or whenever I turn on the more powerful HTPC, it's available. Now if it's just a PCM only track, then you're kinda out of luck but even then I could have sworn any disc with a PCM track also had regular Dolby Digital or DTS at their disposal as an alternate track. Either way you should have options, but DTS-HD MA makes it the easiest.



Ya, there's ALWAYS a drawback and you just have to figure out what is the least painful thing to do without. For me, as much as I want HD audio, that only applies to movies. For streaming and normal TV stuff, it's a non issue. So for me, every day usage I find having all the various services like Netflix, Amazon and HBO being integrated by far more useful. It's also way easier than it ever was before for the rest of the family to use since it's all integrated. I hear you on HBO though. For me it was Disney which was blocked by DirecTV. Fortunately, they finally opened that up. Hopefully HBO Now might let you bypass Comcast once the exclusivity is up.

Before, my HTPC was only for media stored on the server and Netflix sorta worked because of the Windows Media Center version being somewhat friendly to working. But nothing else did easily. As for the other services, forget about it. So to some, I'm sure it sounds surprising that I went away from a $1000 gaming HTPC and switched to a sub $100 Amazon Fire TV. So ya for me, easily going between everything that was remote friendly and easy for the rest of the family was a huge deciding factor. I still can do the other stuff, but since they are less frequently done, I just use either the HTPC or Blu Ray player when I want to do those less frequent tasks.

One last question. What XBMC build are you using on the FireTV? The official Kodi one or another one? I know there is a couple to choose from.

 

[Marty Chinn]

One last question. What XBMC build are you using on the FireTV? The official Kodi one or another one? I know there is a couple to choose from.

I'm still running XBMC Gotham as nothing in Kodi seemed to be worth updating for on the Fire TV. I'm also using a modified version found here that has some tweaks, adds in the XBMC logo when loading into and sets up the launcher so I can launch directly into XBMC whenever I boot up or hit the home button on the remote. That requires root though. Here's a list of the changes:

Modifications:
Helix:
Set Android intent to run as Launcher
Included my XBMC addon repo. See description below. All other modifications that were built into my Gotham builds can be installed as needed from my repo.

Gotham:
Set Android intent to run as Launcher
Set XBMC on FireTV splash screen
Pre-configured Alternate keymap 3 (includes functionality for FF and RW buttons on the FTV controller)
Pre-set "Remote control sends keyboard presses"
Pre-set "Libstagefright" for video acceleration
Removed unnecessary built-in skin "Touched"
Included my "Confluence++" skin, set as default. See description below. (original Confluence skin is still included).
Included my "Android Power Options" screensaver. See description below. Now XBMC can automatically put the FTV to sleep!
Included my XBMC addon repo. See description below.
elmerohueso's XBMC addon repo:
Includes my "Confluence++" skin and "Android Power Options" screensaver, so that they can pull down updates automatically. The repo also includes some other addons that are simply shortcuts to open apps on the FTV, allowing them to be added to the Home screen on any skin. To access, go to System > Settings > Addons > Get Addons > elmerohueso's repo.

"Confluence++" skin:
My modified "Confluence" skin. Changelog/list of modifications.

"Android Power Options" screensaver:
This provides ability to automatically Sleep or Power Off rooted Android devices, along with the option to logoff your XBMC profile prior to sleeping. It includes a SU Permissions check in Settings so you can give XBMC persistent SuperUser permissions.. To enable, go to System > Settings > Appearance > Screensaver and select the "Android Power Options" screensaver. Make sure to check its Settings after selecting it.
For additional changes since the initial version, please see the addon changelog.
Note: I don't recommend having the screensaver power off the FTV as it has no power button. This ability is geared toward other Android devices.

You can find the one I used here:

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2790392

 

[Li Kao]

If I should buy a 4-bay nas minimum, which synology model would you point me to ? I'm talking about this manufacturer because I hear only good things about their software but I'm open.

 

[Marty Chinn]

If I should buy a 4-bay nas minimum, which synology model would you point me to ? I'm talking about this manufacturer because I hear only good things about their software but I'm open.

I think that depends on how much you want to spend and how much you want to be able to expand in the future. Do you want the option to add on an external enclosure to extend the storage pool?

 

[Li Kao]

I think that depends on how much you want to spend and how much you want to be able to expand in the future. Do you want the option to add on an external enclosure to extend the storage pool?

Isn't the expanding thing only possible on the very top end of the nas ? I would hope that with four 6to hd in raid1 I could wait and see quite confortably and even resell the thing if need be. But I'm very new to this technology, maybe I'm saying some stupid things or I'm really aiming too low or too high.
I don't know, ripping my dvd and br collection could very well eat up to 4to I suppose. And then this surely ain't the only thing I want to put on it.

Edit. Western Digital : black (lol), red or green if I just want to add storage capacity to my pc or nas ? I could see myself starting by buying some nice 4to hd..

 

[Marty Chinn]

Isn't the expanding thing only possible on the very top end of the nas ? I would hope that with four 6to hd in raid1 I could wait and see quite confortably and even resell the thing if need be. But I'm very new to this technology, maybe I'm saying some stupid things or I'm really aiming too low or too high.
I don't know, ripping my dvd and br collection could very well eat up to 4to I suppose. And then this surely ain't the only thing I want to put on it.

Edit. Western Digital : black (lol), red or green if I just want to add storage capacity to my pc or nas ?

You definitely have to pay more to get potential expansion but it's not necessarily the very top end though. It's more like just the next level up. It also depends on how much content you have too. Just a quick glance, I ripped all my Disney Blu Rays to the server and a couple other kids movies and the raw rips takes up over 2TB for 84 movies. Another set of movies has 65 movies and those are more live action films and that takes up 2TB. So right there is 4TB but that's not all the movies I have. I think I have like 1.5TB of photos and home videos alone. I also store my photos in RAW format so that adds up quick. I also do two drive redundancy just so I'm not exposed in the case one drive dies.

Now if you are using 1 drive redundancy, you have 18TB at your disposal so it sounds like a lot but depending on what you have, it can add up quick and you gotta think over time what you're going to use. In my case, I'd have over 50% capacity filled already before I started factoring in other stuff. However also in my case, I went with 4TB drives because of the price to storage ratio being much more reasonable at 4TB than 6TB at the time I bought it. I just personally didn't want to worry about what happens when I hit the limit as I knew going from my first NAS, how overtime the limit creeps up on you and then becomes painful, especially if you want to migrate to a new server. So for me, I just wanted to extend my potential expandability up front rather than worry about it later.

As far as drives go, I went with WD Reds since they're slightly better for NAS usage.

 

[TarpitCarnivore]

If I should buy a 4-bay nas minimum, which synology model would you point me to ? I'm talking about this manufacturer because I hear only good things about their software but I'm open.

I went for the DS415+ which is an update version of the DS412+. The biggest difference, on paper, is it has a quad-core Atom versus dual-core. You wont be able to do much transcoding with it beyond 480p. The 412+ is probably fine for a lot of people I just wanted the newest.

As for drives I went for 4TB Deskstars. Had one show up DOA.

If you want something more you're going to be spending a lot and at that point you'd be better of building.

 

[darkazcura]

I'm still running XBMC Gotham as nothing in Kodi seemed to be worth updating for on the Fire TV. I'm also using a modified version found here that has some tweaks, adds in the XBMC logo when loading into and sets up the launcher so I can launch directly into XBMC whenever I boot up or hit the home button on the remote. That requires root though. Here's a list of the changes:



You can find the one I used here:

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2790392

Thanks for all your help (and captive too!)! I actually went out and got a FireTV to try it out. Actually worked pretty well for a bit, but it started buffering every now and then when I tried it later in the night. I'm going to try to increase the cache with an advancedsetting file I saw over on kodi's wiki. I am probably going to end up returning it, though, because unfortunately VC-1 encoded files perform really poorly (Amazon didn't license the codec so no hardware acceleration even though the SOC supports it). It's kinda confusing, though, because some tech specs mention the FireTV supports VC-1 on their website, and others do not. Researching a bit online shows that the FireTV definitely does not officially support VC-1 so no luck. :/ A few of my favorite movies are VC-1 encoded so that's probably going to be a dealbreaker for me unfortunately. I could re-encode, but that's a hassle I've been trying to avoid for the most part. I guess this is where the Chromebox may be my solution, but I may dropback to Plex/transcoding for now.

Streaming full bitrate blu-rays over wireless, though, was a lot more promising than I thought! I'm confident I'll be able to do it sooner than later with another device now.

 

[Pachimari]

If it were me, I wouldn't run 4 drives without some kind of redundancy. JBOD is "just a bunch of disks" so if one fails you're kind of screwed.

Oh you're saying something. So I guess I should go for another Synology NAS, which is also quite expensive for me.

I agree. However, even more important than that is to have a cache drive IMO. It will significantly reduce the strain on the other HDDs on your system. The more you have the more important it is. I've had my unraid server for more than 6 years and I have yet to have a drive fail on me (surprisingly, not even the cache), simply because they're spun off most of the time.

So you say I should connect an external hard drive to my NAS?

 

[crazygambit]

So you say I should connect an external hard drive to my NAS?

If you have constant downloads going on, definitely. A small 500GB drive works well and can be found cheap. If it dies you just lose a day's worth of stuff (assuming you have a moving script that works daily). It's handled automatically in unraid, I don't know how it would work on your set up.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Thanks for all your help (and captive too!)! I actually went out and got a FireTV to try it out. Actually worked pretty well for a bit, but it started buffering every now and then when I tried it later in the night. I'm going to try to increase the cache with an advancedsetting file I saw over on kodi's wiki. I am probably going to end up returning it, though, because unfortunately VC-1 encoded files perform really poorly (Amazon didn't license the codec so no hardware acceleration even though the SOC supports it). It's kinda confusing, though, because some tech specs mention the FireTV supports VC-1 on their website, and others do not. Researching a bit online shows that the FireTV definitely does not officially support VC-1 so no luck. :/ A few of my favorite movies are VC-1 encoded so that's probably going to be a dealbreaker for me unfortunately. I could re-encode, but that's a hassle I've been trying to avoid for the most part. I guess this is where the Chromebox may be my solution, but I may dropback to Plex/transcoding for now.

Streaming full bitrate blu-rays over wireless, though, was a lot more promising than I thought! I'm confident I'll be able to do it sooner than later with another device now.

Crap, totally forgot about the VC-1 aspect. Sorry about that. I could have saved you some trouble there. Most of the stuff I've been streaming lately has been modern stuff and Disney stuff for my daughter so it slipped my mind that VC-1 was problematic. I have a few movies too that have that codec that just don't work well as a result. Heh like you said, there's always a drawback sadly.

I've heard some people have buffering issues, but there have been things that people did to solve that. It was never an issue for me, but it's definitely a fixable thing.

 

[TarpitCarnivore]

Oh you're saying something. So I guess I should go for another Synology NAS, which is also quite expensive for me.


So you say I should connect an external hard drive to my NAS?

I have my stuff download to a SSD in my HTPC first so all the post processing happens there and then it moves.

 

[darkazcura]

Crap, totally forgot about the VC-1 aspect. Sorry about that. I could have saved you some trouble there. Most of the stuff I've been streaming lately has been modern stuff and Disney stuff for my daughter so it slipped my mind that VC-1 was problematic. I have a few movies too that have that codec that just don't work well as a result. Heh like you said, there's always a drawback sadly.

I've heard some people have buffering issues, but there have been things that people did to solve that. It was never an issue for me, but it's definitely a fixable thing.

It's alright man. It's been fun to try out! I turned Classic TV into a shortcut for Kodi and replaced the icon with a Kodi icon. It's like the app came with it now. I also increased the cache and fill rate applied to Kodi to decrease buffering. Seems like it worked! I'm pretty optimistic about being able to steam all my blu rays one day on another device. Maybe the next Fire TV will support VC1. Really a downer about that cause I have Kodi working really well right now. Surprised I don't see more people complaining about this honestly. A bunch of popular movies have the codec like The Dark Knight. At least my copy did..

I almost feel like some workaround has to exist, but I guess that's wishful thinking.

 

[B-B-Bomba!]

Why monthly backups as opposed to nightly or even more frequent? That's really the only problem with that setup; there is a very realistic chance that at some point you will lose up to a month's worth of data.

I would recommend using Backblaze/Crashplan in place of the 3TB USB drive.

Bit late but thanks for the replies. Monthly backups are quite adequate for the value of the data being backed up and the frequency of new material being added. Thanks for your concern however!

I'd never heard of Backblaze or Crashplan before, but I wish I had. Thanks for the advice. From a bit of reading it seems only Crashplan is able to support NAS backups, and even then it's a bit of a fiddle. I wouldn't be uncomfortable with it though, and the value for money seems pretty clear. I do already have the USB drive though which is why it's part of the plan.

We'll see, I'm a ways off buying the NAS yet anyway. My concern really was whether a 3TB USB drive is large enough to back up a 3TB NAS drive. I suppose as long as the NAS drive isn't approaching full there shouldn't be a problem.

 

[TarpitCarnivore]

Neither support them, but there are ways to make them work. For a windows based machine you have to use a batch file to auto-mount the shares at log on. Using the built-in "Reconnect at login" dialog isn't fast enough and loads after the Crashplan daemon.

In OSX I've been able to have Crashplan see it without any trickery. I suspect it may have to do with the way OSX handles drive mounting compared to Windows.

A lot of synology users have been requesting a Crashplan package in package manager, but I suspect Crashplan has been reluctant because of the abuse that can happen.

 

[Marty Chinn]

A lot of synology users have been requesting a Crashplan package in package manager, but I suspect Crashplan has been reluctant because of the abuse that can happen.

Setting up Crashplan on Synology is reasonably simple to do and in a way it works better than when I was using it on a WHS. Before on WHS, I'd have to remote in to check on it but now with it running on a Synology, I just have a client on my laptop that I can use to connect to the Synology to view which is way way better than before.

 

[TarpitCarnivore]

Setting up Crashplan on Synology is reasonably simple to do and in a way it works better than when I was using it on a WHS. Before on WHS, I'd have to remote in to check on it but now with it running on a Synology, I just have a client on my laptop that I can use to connect to the Synology to view which is way way better than before.

I need to look into it because I'd prefer to have it running there.

 

[B-B-Bomba!]

In OSX I've been able to have Crashplan see it without any trickery. I suspect it may have to do with the way OSX handles drive mounting compared to Windows.

"CrashPlan runs as a Windows service and therefore cannot access drives mounted by a user."

http://support.code42.com/

 

[captive]

"CrashPlan runs as a Windows service and therefore cannot access drives mounted by a user."

http://support.code42.com/

It can if you trick it like he said. I had two iSCSI drives on my virtual machine that had crash plan. I told crash plan to start backing up those drives. When I switched them from iSCSI to just CIFS shared from the server, I disabled the crash plan service mapped the network drives with the same drive letter after disconnecting the iSCSI targets, restart the crash plan service and it doesn't know the difference. I believe they are not allowing mapped drives to be backed up, on purpose.

 

[TarpitCarnivore]

"CrashPlan runs as a Windows service and therefore cannot access drives mounted by a user."

http://support.code42.com/

That link tells you exactly how to make it work. I've been using that set up for two years and it's been flawless. It's just an unsupported method so if something goes wrong they wont help you.

 

[Marty Chinn]

I need to look into it because I'd prefer to have it running there.

I believe this is the guide I followed:

http://www.hanselman.com/blog/UPDAT...lanCloudBackupOnASynologyNASRunningDSM50.aspx

 

[iNvid02]

I believe this is the guide I followed:

http://www.hanselman.com/blog/UPDAT...lanCloudBackupOnASynologyNASRunningDSM50.aspx

I followed the same guide, everything runs without a hitch. Would recommend it.

Once a DSM update borked it but a workaround was available really quickly and the creator pcloadletter implemented a fix soon after.