linux experts?

tavernman

OH I forgot to say Fat32 will only accept files <4GB , hope you haven't got any big HD files

enfield_freddy

ok , thanks , head spinning here ,


up to now: , desk computer , dlink nas , then added a "cyclone" media player , this could read files (vids) on either my computer or my nas.


just built a stand alone media centre using http://www.xcase.co.uk/x-case-q100-home-theater-htpc-case-29-99-x-case.html , a new motherboard and cpu etc , just running openelec , without windows , this also can see files on my nas , and play them.


I decided to add another h/drive in the box to store media , instead of using the nas to access (portable) , and found that a 1t drive formatted in ntfs was not seen, hence the googling to find fat32 (and ext4 (and programs to exceeds microsofts imposed 32g limit on fat.


having been used to the copy speed from my computer to the nas , and back I was disappointed with the media centre (Linux box)


as stated above , hopefully this will be its only full loading ,

enfield_freddy

tavernman wrote: »

OH I forgot to say Fat32 will only accept files <4GB , hope you haven't got any big HD files

yup well spotted I "handbraked" a load of vids last week so I,m sure there are non

esuhl

enfield_freddy wrote: »

I decided to add another h/drive in the box to store media , instead of using the nas to access (portable) , and found that a 1t drive formatted in ntfs was not seen, hence the googling to find fat32 (and ext4 (and programs to exceeds microsofts imposed 32g limit on fat.

Ah, right. That drive is connected to a Linux machine (right?), so I'd format it with either ext3 or ext4. (Personally I prefer ext3 just because it's older, more compatible, etc. But I'm probably an old fogie and most people will say to go for ext4... :-/)

enfield_freddy wrote: »

having been used to the copy speed from my computer to the nas , and back I was disappointed with the media centre (Linux box)

You might find it quicker using NFS instead of Samba if you can. Have you measured the difference in file transfer speeds? Is the media centre consistently slow, or does the speed fluctuate a lot during a transfer?

(I'm not too sure what it could be, to be honest.)

tavernman

A quick question about your connectivity , are you using Cat5E cable and are you using a switch or just via the router ? Please tell me you aren't using homeplugs or wifi adaptors

tavernman

Oh another observation since you are going from the Nas to the PC to the Mediabox you only have one ethernet card on your PC ergo it is doing in and out at the same time

enfield_freddy

ok , sorry for me coming back , its formatted in fat32 now , I tested it and it was shown in Linux , and windows as well , so its going to be an easy job adding a couple of gig per day , if I convert to ext3 or 4 , will I be able to see it when I click on a network drive?




PS its found 1 file 4.7g , and is asking what to do

tavernman

enfield_freddy wrote: »

ok , sorry for me coming back , its formatted in fat32 now , I tested it and it was shown in Linux , and windows as well , so its going to be an easy job adding a couple of gig per day , if I convert to ext3 or 4 , will I be able to see it when I click on a network drive?




PS its found 1 file 4.7g , and is asking what to do

Yes , I can see my WDTV box (ext3) Humax (ext2) and Fedora Box (ext4) from my windows boxes(7,8.1 and 10), and copy to and from them.

esuhl

enfield_freddy wrote: »

ok , sorry for me coming back , its formatted in fat32 now , I tested it and it was shown in Linux , and windows as well , so its going to be an easy job adding a couple of gig per day , if I convert to ext3 or 4 , will I be able to see it when I click on a network drive?

Yes -- you'll get better performance using a Linux filesystem. I've done a quick search and it looks like ext3 is best for reliability, but some of the newer filesystems will probably be faster, which might be more important for a media server... (although it all depends on your hardware not being a bottleneck).

Just to re-clarify. The filesystem on a drive is only important to the machine (A) that it's installed in. When machine B connects to request a file, A will read the file from disk, and then transmit that data over the network using a shared protocol (usually either Samba or NFS). B doesn't need to be able (and won't be able!) to read A's hard drive contents directly.

enfield_freddy wrote: »

PS its found 1 file 4.7g , and is asking what to do

On a FAT32 drive?!