WDTV Forum - WDTV Media Player

WDTV LIVE Groups => WDTV LIVE Homebrew / Custom Firmware => Topic started by: choekstr on March 19, 2010, 05:52:14 PM

Title: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: choekstr on March 19, 2010, 05:52:14 PM
I recently decided to try to get my high bitrate files to stop stuttering, something many people are perpetually searching to accomplish.  3 wifi dongles later I realized I was only going to get so much transfer rate using 802.11N at the distance the client is from the Access Point.  One of the issues is we default to using SMB aka CIFS aka Windows file sharing for convenience.  It really is just an inefficient protocol.  

The connected rate I am seeing at distance is 135Mb/s out of a theoretical max of 300Mb/s.  here is what iwconfig shows:
Code: [Select]
ra0       RT2870 Wireless  ESSID:"PimpLair_N"  Nickname:"RT2870STA"
          Mode:Managed  Frequency:5.26GHz  Access Point: 00:1E:E5:9D:71:1A  
          Bit Rate=135Mb/s  
          RTS thr:off   Fragment thr:off

So using my fastest adapter I wanted to start tweaking the settings test the various protocols that mount would support and find the best transfer speeds I could find.  Since I couldn't find iperf compiled for the WDTV Live, I wrote a bandwidth test script to repeatedly transfer a file and show the average bitrate.  The test methodology is transfer a file 10 times, calculate the transfer speed for each pass, and then calculate the average transfer rate for 10 times.  Then do the 10 pass test once again to re-validate the results.  I was shocked at the speed differences the choice in protocol makes!

NFS is by far the fastest at ~73Mb/sec!
(http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc191/choekstr/NFS.png)


Then comes FTP protocol using FTPfs mounting:
(http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc191/choekstr/FTPfs.png)


Almost but not quite last is our beloved/hated SMB using SMBfs:
(http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc191/choekstr/SMBfs.png)


And slowest of all is the SSH method using SSHfs (cpu limited):
(http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc191/choekstr/SSHfs.png)


Because NFS was so radically higher (I expected around 30% faster) I re-ran the NFS test at the end and came up with the same results:
(http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc191/choekstr/NFS_Attempt2.png)


Now realize the bitrates of movies vary from around 1Mb/sec for low-end SD content, to around 4-8Mb/sec for 720p movies.  It gets interesting when you start ripping BluRay movies at 1080p.  Most of the files you encounter and download on the Internet at 1080p are up to 12Mb/sec.  When people archive their own Rips it isn't uncommon to see bitrates as high as 20-45Mb/sec.  This is why many people have a hard time transferring large 1080p movies over wireless.  The bitrates just aren't there to transfer that much content!

I can safely say that my largest movie is a self rip of Twilight at 30.880Mb/sec (finally checked instead of guessing) and weighing in at a whopping 27GB filesize and I could never transfer it without it stuttering at some point.  I finally got NFS working properly and now it is as smooth as butter.  a 30.880Mb/sec movie hardly taxes my wifi card using NFS at 73Mb/sec.  Take that massive movies!

So if you are struggling with transfer rates and always wondered if switching to a different protocol would help, here is a pretty good test that will help determine if it will.  NOTE:  Mounting a SMB share via net.mounts or manually using xmounts WILL NOT do anything for speed over what the built-in automatic method you use in the OSD.

Enjoy and discuss.

P.S.: detailed methodology, scripts, and wifi cards used were left out of this write-up for brevity sake but if you care, just ask.
EDIT:
2010.03.19 bandwidth_test script is now attached to post.

EDIT:
2011.08.30 bandwidth_test script re-attached to post as the forum somehow lost it. Remove .txt and leave .sh extension
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: b-rad.cc on March 19, 2010, 06:01:29 PM
i'd love to include this script in wdlxtv :)

i won't be releasing tonight due to missing deadline--aka going out of town now and not done--so I'll get iperf in there too for you in next release ;) (def by sunday)
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: choekstr on March 19, 2010, 06:07:25 PM
Let me "un-choekstr" it a bit so it is more generic and then you can add it in and beef it up if you want.  Give me a few mins to tweak and I will attach to the main post.

EDIT: Script attached to orig post.
I would love to have iperf if you have the time to cross-compile it.  I haven't taken the time to setup a compiling environment and so if you don't mind that would be great.

I would also like to keep a chart on the wiki of adapters and what rates they get for each protocol.  We have that a bit for the 1st gen adapters but nothing for the 2nd gen or Live. 
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: geordi on March 20, 2010, 12:21:52 PM
Hi

One stupid question ... if I have Win7 64Bit i need an addon to have the possibility to share attached storage via NFS, correct?

Can to the WD attached storage shared via NFS so that my PC can access it via NFS? Or is only Samba possible?

Regards,
geordi
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: Padavan on March 20, 2010, 01:02:09 PM
choekstr
to all

I confirm this fact.

My config:
- WDTV Gen2 with WDLXTV_G2-0.4.1.9 fw (more thanks for brad-cc).
- WiFi USB adapter D-LINK DWA-140 Rev.B1 (based on ralink 2870). 
- WiFi access point based on D-LINK DIR-655 router (802.11n, frequency 2.4 GHz, bandwidth 40MHz, WPA2PSK+AES).

In the connection status, raw speed established on 240...300 mbps.

I use test mkv and m2ts files with H.264 HD 1080p.

If use mount SMB share (aka CIFS), max real speed near 35 mbps. 
Casino.21.mkv - passed
Casino.32.mkv - passed
Casino.40.mkv - stuttering

All BD-remux (from 25 to 50 mbs) play with stuttering.

If use mount NFS share (I use haneWIN NFS server for Windows), max real speed near 95 mbps!!! 
All BD-remux (from 25 to 50 mbs) playing perfect!
Very hard test bird90.m2ts (90mbps) playing perfect!
Only bird90.mkv has stuttering.

ONLY NFS FOREVER!
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: choekstr on March 20, 2010, 05:51:09 PM
@Padavan:  Nice that you can confirm and it shows that the raw speed connected DOES have an impact on the speed of transfer.  I have been thinking about maybe a chart of adapters, raw speed they connect, and the actual throughput of each of the protocols.  This would be a nice chart for a newbie to pick his adapter and protocol.  I have heard of maximum of 110-120 with a 300Mbps connected device!  You are pretty close to this...

@geordi: there is no built-in way for Win7 to do NFS.  You can buy 3rd party programs but NFS is a Unix/Linux thing and has been around for decades.  We all know it is a very efficient protocol and it is nice when we see numbers to support it.  Actually it isn't that it is super fast, it is just efficient so it uses as much of the bandwidth it possibly can.  Contrast this with SMB/CIFS from Microsoft where it is a bloated and convoluted protocol that cripples network transports.  With Vista and Win7 they seem to have broken it again and it is just barely back to where it was on Win98 and WinXP!

Some NAS's have NFS built-in along with SMB.  If there is a choice you should choose NFS and use xmount.  Realize the built-in GUI in the WD TV Live is only going to connect to windows and NAS shares on SMB so you can't use it this way.  You would use xmounts in a net.mounts file and then access that share in the "Local Drives" section.  I have switched over to this permanently now and even RW/FF updates the keyframes faster and more often!
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: oogabooga on March 20, 2010, 06:53:37 PM
Hi choekstr,

Thanks so much!  Exactly what I was looking for :)

Now only if there was a way to NFS mount an HFS+ formatted drive :(

Sam
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: choekstr on March 20, 2010, 09:02:00 PM
NFS is a network transport method.
HFS is a filesystem type.

You would use NFS or SMB or FTP or SFTP or SSH to transfer the files from an HFS drive.  I am pretty sure any OSX machine can mount an HFS+ drive and share it out over NFS. 
http://wiki.wdlxtv.com/Sharing_from_OSX (http://wiki.wdlxtv.com/Sharing_from_OSX)
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: oogabooga on March 22, 2010, 07:13:49 PM
I'm trying to go the other way - have my WDTV mount my HFS-formatted Drobo and then serve that via NFS to my laptop for when I need to xfer files to Drobo. 

Doesn't seem to work with the NFS implementation in WDTV (or a number of Linux distros, FWIR).
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: larsar4 on March 22, 2010, 07:36:26 PM
@padavan or anyone else that would help :-)

I was trying to setup nfs for my windows 7 setup.  Could you tell me how you setup your haneWIN server and how you used the xmount command on the wdtv?

Thanks!
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: choekstr on March 22, 2010, 07:43:53 PM
That doesn't seem right.  I have nothing to test this on but a quick search shows several people getting HFS drives to mount and any directory on the WD could be shared out via NFS.  What you want to do is theoretically possible with the firmware as it currently stands.  I can't help you with what it takes to make it happen but in principle it isn't that hard.  

Now digging into more about this Drobo thing, it sounds like a dud when it came out but fine, I won't judge.  Engadget review states "Data rates are acceptable -- we averaged 12-15MBps write throughput during large file transfers. Drobo promised "mid-range" performance, and that's what it delivers."  That equates to 96-120Mb/sec so you should have decent performance.  FWIW, modern drives push 120-150MBps and raided drives are even more.  The drobo brings it down to 1/10th the speed of the drive itself but then again USB 2.0 and all.  But I digress.

So you have USB attached storage, which should present as a mass storage drive, which the WD should mount.  Does it?  The HFS or NTFS partition shouldn't be seen by the OS.  Or does it?  Maybe that is where the problem lies is that their implementation of HFS is non-standard?  But wait, one review said none of their software is needed and Windows can interface directly with the Drobo.  Does that mean it can read HFS drives or just NTFS and OSX is able to deal with the HFS.

Really I am just thinking out loud and asking mostly rhetorical questions here.
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: oogabooga on March 22, 2010, 07:47:24 PM
Hey Chris,

Thanks for the comments/thoughts.  I will try a non-Drobo HFS drive tomorrow and see if I can NFS connect to it.  My only successes so far have been with NTFS-formatted drives. 

Cheers,
Sam
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: choekstr on March 22, 2010, 07:49:44 PM
@padavan or anyone else that would help :-)

I was trying to setup nfs for my windows 7 setup.  Could you tell me how you setup your haneWIN server and how you used the xmount command on the wdtv?

Thanks!

I watched a surprisingly competent video on this two days ago.  It is for xtreamer player but it shows you how to do the hanewin nfs server side.
Configuring Windows 7 as NFS Server for XTreamer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZwA5H1tLmw#)

For the xmounts side that is easy:
xmount IP_ADDRESS:NFS_Share Mount_point nfs

so something like this:
Code: [Select]
xmount 10.0.1.2:/ftp/pub/Video Video_NFS nfs You can test interactively (telnet/ssh) to make sure it is working as you desire before you put it in the net.mounts file.
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: larsar4 on March 22, 2010, 08:48:55 PM
@choekstr

wow thanks for the help however I'm still without nfs so far

this is how I've setup hanewin

G:\Download\Movies -public -readonly -name:tvshows

this is what I'm getting though:
Code: [Select]
# xmount 192.168.1.136:/tvshows tvshows_NFS nfs
mount: RPC: Timed out

any ideas?
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: b-rad.cc on March 22, 2010, 08:50:17 PM
you could try -o nolock

portmap not running gives an error like that.
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: rokr on March 22, 2010, 09:22:56 PM
@larsar4
my settings (videos are located in G:\movies in my laptop)

laptop is 192.168.1.2
wdlive is 192.168.1.4

hanewin nfs server exports file ------->   G:\movies 192.168.1.4

telnet command to the Live ------->    xmount 192.168.1.2:/g/movies movies nfs

the "movies" folder then appears in the WD Live "Local drives"

EDIT:
2 things are very important:
1. disable or add permissions to your firewall for the nfs server ports
2. restart the server after changing the exports file, there's a "Restart server" button for this in Hanewin
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: larsar4 on March 23, 2010, 04:53:49 AM
thanks for the suggestions everyone im at work now but i'll try these as soon as I get home
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: choekstr on March 23, 2010, 07:17:00 AM
or if you can't get to the portmapper ports.  Try turning off your windows firewall and see if you can connect.  If so, just find the ports you need to exclude to keep it running and still allow NFS. 
Frankly I am surprised that the apps don't make exclusions for you but then again it is a free tool and very few do this on the behalf of the user.

Also, try turning off your NAV, KAV, Avast, etc.  Anything that might be blocking inbound ports.
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: larsar4 on March 23, 2010, 06:14:31 PM
turned off my windows firewall and now it works!  I'll have to add exception in the windows firewall.  Thanks for the help everyone!
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: oogabooga on March 23, 2010, 07:09:50 PM
Hey choekstr,

I've come up empty in my attempts, and I don't think I've found any searches yet where someone was able share an HFS drive via NFS *from* the WDTV.  I can confirm the reverse, sharing my HFS drive connected to the Mac, can be done via NFS.

If you do know of someone for whom this has worked, I'd be very grateful if you could point me in the right direction. 

I've done everything I listed here: http://wdtvforum.com/main/index.php?topic=4938.msg38666#msg38666 (http://wdtvforum.com/main/index.php?topic=4938.msg38666#msg38666)  which works for sharing my NTFS and FAT32 formatted drives via NFS from the WDTV.

Cheers,
Sam
That doesn't seem right.  I have nothing to test this on but a quick search shows several people getting HFS drives to mount and any directory on the WD could be shared out via NFS.  What you want to do is theoretically possible with the firmware as it currently stands.  I can't help you with what it takes to make it happen but in principle it isn't that hard.  

Now digging into more about this Drobo thing, it sounds like a dud when it came out but fine, I won't judge.  Engadget review states "Data rates are acceptable -- we averaged 12-15MBps write throughput during large file transfers. Drobo promised "mid-range" performance, and that's what it delivers."  That equates to 96-120Mb/sec so you should have decent performance.  FWIW, modern drives push 120-150MBps and raided drives are even more.  The drobo brings it down to 1/10th the speed of the drive itself but then again USB 2.0 and all.  But I digress.

So you have USB attached storage, which should present as a mass storage drive, which the WD should mount.  Does it?  The HFS or NTFS partition shouldn't be seen by the OS.  Or does it?  Maybe that is where the problem lies is that their implementation of HFS is non-standard?  But wait, one review said none of their software is needed and Windows can interface directly with the Drobo.  Does that mean it can read HFS drives or just NTFS and OSX is able to deal with the HFS.

Really I am just thinking out loud and asking mostly rhetorical questions here.
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: b-rad.cc on March 23, 2010, 07:14:46 PM
bug paragon, its a problem with their NTFS/HFS driver.

...BUT, you can't export fuse filesystems via NFS either--without kernel modification.
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: larsar4 on March 23, 2010, 09:08:07 PM
well just as a comparison. I'm running on a G  connection through a router setup as a repeater.

For NFS I'm getting 25Mb/s

For SMB I'm getting 8.5 Mb/s

just another data point

If nothing else it lets me know that it's time to upgrade to N :-)

Thanks again!

Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: choekstr on March 23, 2010, 09:11:42 PM
That's exactly what I wanted this thread to be:  A place where we can post our results and allow others to use it as data points for comparison (or upgrading reasons :))

Thanks for the data.  I envision having a wiki chart like they have for 1st gen that shows what kind of speeds we can get with what adapters.  Can you edit your post and add in your iwconfig bitrate and also the brand of adapter you are using?  This would be good for the future chart.
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: larsar4 on March 24, 2010, 07:15:20 PM
hey choekstr

so I'm connecting via Ethernet to a router and that's connected wirelessly to my main router (which is connected to the modem).  Is there a different command to see the connection speed through ethernet?
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: choekstr on March 24, 2010, 08:05:34 PM
put something on the ethernet link that you can mount and transfer the file from there.
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: larsar4 on March 24, 2010, 08:10:01 PM
put something on the ethernet link that you can mount and transfer the file from there.

I'm not sure if I understand.  I already downloaded something from my main computer (which is connected to the main router).  But I was looking for a command similar to iwconfig for ethernet.
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: choekstr on March 24, 2010, 08:21:41 PM
Oh, now you are making more sense.  ;)

that would be ifconfig
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: larsar4 on March 24, 2010, 08:32:17 PM
yeah I'm not sure if that info is helpful

Code: [Select]
# ifconfig
eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:90:A9:73:01:A7
          inet addr:192.168.1.128  Bcast:192.168.1.255  Mask:255.255.255.0
          UP BROADCAST NOTRAILERS RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
          RX packets:7618 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:5034 errors:0 dropped:79 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:256
          RX bytes:3300036 (3.1 MiB)  TX bytes:832289 (812.7 KiB)
          Interrupt:46

lo        Link encap:Local Loopback
          inet addr:127.0.0.1  Mask:255.0.0.0
          UP LOOPBACK RUNNING  MTU:16436  Metric:1
          RX packets:351855 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:351855 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
          RX bytes:33333219 (31.7 MiB)  TX bytes:33333219 (31.7 MiB)
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: choekstr on March 24, 2010, 08:50:53 PM
You mean you want to know what speed your 100Mbps ethernet link is connecting at?  Well my guess is 100Mbps and it will usually be 100Mbps unless something is royally broken on your network, but we are missing the tool, ethtool, to tell us for sure.

However you can grep out what speed it is initialized as from /tmp/messages.txt:
Code: [Select]
grep Mbps /tmp/messages.txt
Dec 31 18:00:18 wdtv user.info kernel: tangox_enet0: Ethernet driver for SMP864x/SMP865x internal MAC core 0: 100Mbps Base at 0x26000

It will always (well not always but mostly) be 100Mbps for a 100Mbps nic.  Actual throughput varies though and is why we care and test the throughput.
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: larsar4 on March 24, 2010, 08:57:54 PM
lol yeah that's a good point...

Code: [Select]
# grep Mbps /tmp/messages.txt
Dec 31 16:00:20 wdtvlive user.info kernel: tangox_enet0: Ethernet driver for SMP864x/SMP865x internal MAC core 0: 100Mbps Base at 0x26000
Dec 31 16:00:25 wdtvlive user.info kernel: eth0: link up, 100Mbps, full-duplex, lpa 0x45E1


Maybe I can connect to my wireless router and run that command or find it hrough the gui interface.  I'll let you know if I have any luck.

Thanks for all the help!
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: sweetvn on March 29, 2010, 06:36:58 PM
Hi can someone please help

I'm trying to mount my NAS on wdtvlive as NFS

I get this message

# xmount 192.168.2.2:/mnt/HD_a2/ nfs
mount: can't find /tmp/media/usb/nfs in /etc/fstab

Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: larsar4 on March 29, 2010, 06:40:41 PM
if you've set everything else correctly then it looks like you're using the xmount command incorrectly.

it should be in this format

Code: [Select]
#xmount 192.168.0.44:/nfsroot ShareName nfs
it looks like you forgot to name the share

your script could be something like this

Code: [Select]
xmount 192.168.2.2:/mnt/HD_a2 movies_NFS nfs
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: sweetvn on March 29, 2010, 08:18:13 PM
if you've set everything else correctly then it looks like you're using the xmount command incorrectly.

it should be in this format

Code: [Select]
#xmount 192.168.0.44:/nfsroot ShareName nfs
it looks like you forgot to name the share

your script could be something like this

Code: [Select]
xmount 192.168.2.2:/mnt/HD_a2 movies_NFS nfs

I got this figure out ...

First, I have to set on my Dlink NAS the wdtvlive ip and the folder that wdtlive can access,
Then I SSH in and use
xmount 192.168.2.2:/mnt/HD_a2/NAS  NASnfs nfs
and BAM! it WORKS!

My next question is ... when I put that command into net.mounts, it doesn't automount on boot up, I have to do it manually, what should I set in order for it to work?  I read on some post I might have to set NSF time delay, I'll try that tomorrow see if that work


Now I another problem I'm have a Live#1 with a hard drive attached, with this address /tmp/media/usb/USB2/A688982B8897F7CF, I'm trying to mount this drive via NFS on my Live #2 box, I used the following command:

xmount 192.168.2.3:/tmp/media/usb/USB2/A688982B8897F7CF WDTV nfs
and this is what I get in return
mount: 192.168.2.3:/tmp/media/usb/USB2/A688982B8897F7CF failed, reason given by server: Permission denied

Seem like it want me to give a username and password, but WDTVLive unit doesn't have username and password beside the root/wdtvlive I used when SSH

so any thought?
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: larsar4 on March 29, 2010, 08:33:18 PM
not sure if this is what is looks like but I think this is how you need to turn on the nfs server in S00custom-options

##Enable NFSD kernel NFS server (default: OFF)
#config_tool -c NFSD=ON

##Enable NFSD auto export mode (default: OFF)
## (requires NFSD_AUTO_DEFAULT)
## (overrides /conf/exports)
#config_tool -c NFSD_AUTO=ON
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: choekstr on March 30, 2010, 05:37:22 AM
My next question is ... when I put that command into net.mounts, it doesn't automount on boot up, I have to do it manually, what should I set in order for it to work?  I read on some post I might have to set NSF time delay, I'll try that tomorrow see if that work
It does sound like a delay issue.  I have to put 20-30 seconds in and it seems to work reliably.  See if that does it for you.

Now I another problem I'm have a Live#1 with a hard drive attached, with this address /tmp/media/usb/USB2/A688982B8897F7CF, I'm trying to mount this drive via NFS on my Live #2 box, I used the following command:

xmount 192.168.2.3:/tmp/media/usb/USB2/A688982B8897F7CF WDTV nfs
and this is what I get in return
mount: 192.168.2.3:/tmp/media/usb/USB2/A688982B8897F7CF failed, reason given by server: Permission denied

Seem like it want me to give a username and password, but WDTVLive unit doesn't have username and password beside the root/wdtvlive I used when SSH

so any thought?
This sounds like a permission problem sharing on the Live#1 box.  What did you set for your NFSD_AUTO_DEFAULT settings?:
##NFSD auto export mode default setting
#config_tool -c NFSD_AUTO_DEFAULT='192.168.0.234(rw,async,no_subtree_check) 192.168.0.199(rw,async,no_subtree_check)'

You might also want to spend time with the NFS server thread and get to know it better. (Live #1 is the sever, Live #2 is your client)
http://wdtvforum.com/main/index.php?topic=4482.0 (http://wdtvforum.com/main/index.php?topic=4482.0)
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: abatt on March 30, 2010, 05:55:49 AM
I have win7 with haneWIN NFS Server. Before i upgrade with WDLXTV 0.4.1.9 i used a WDLXTV 0.4.0.0 and my WD live see my nfs share , after upgrade with the latest version , sometimes i see share , sometimes no. I use net.mounts :
# Mount an NFS share
#
xmount 192.168.168.102:/Movies Movies nfs
xmount 192.168.168.102:/MP3 MP3 nfs
xmount 192.168.168.102:/Photo Photo nfs
xmount 192.168.168.102:/Video Video nfs

i turned off win7 password protected share. Where's the problem ? Could someone help ?:)
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: choekstr on March 30, 2010, 06:42:52 AM
I too have intermittent mounting and I have deduced it as a race condition with the network.  The problem is that the xmounts run before the network is up and running and therefore they don't get mounted...sometimes.  It all depends on how quick the network initializes and becomes ready.  You can verify this by doing a:
grep WTF /tmp/messages.txt

It does seem to be a recent release issue and I haven't needed it before 0.4.1.9.* but now I just use:
config_tool -c NET_MOUNTS_DELAY=30
and it fixes it.  Well, it should fix it but it doesn't actually take the setting on bootup for whatever reason (but does for others) and has been described as a config_tool limitation or bug.  Argh.

So I switched to using ext3 firmware, set it on the cmdline and then it works each boot.  I also leave it in the S00custom-options just to be safe.
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: Eugen1968 on March 30, 2010, 02:49:18 PM
I'm trying to mount my HDD connected on wdtvlive USB as NFS. External HDD is NTFS format

I get this message:

Mar 30 22:34:47 WDTVLIVE user.notice S94nfsserver: WDTVLIVE not online, NFSD cannot start!
Mar 30 22:34:53 WDTVLIVE user.notice xmount: xmount 192.168.2.5:/tmp/media/usb/USB2/AC50D99C50D96E18 wdtvlive nfs soft,intr FAILED WTF?!?

But wdtvlive is online, works ftp and putty.
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: sweetvn on March 30, 2010, 09:24:04 PM

[/quote]
This sounds like a permission problem sharing on the Live#1 box.  What did you set for your NFSD_AUTO_DEFAULT settings?:

#config_tool -c NFSD_AUTO_DEFAULT='192.168.0.234(rw,async,no_subtree_check) 192.168.0.199(rw,async,no_subtree_check)'[/color]

[/quote]

What is the first IP address? 192.168.0.234(rw,async,no_subtree_check is this for wdtv-server?
2nd ip 192.168.0.199(rw,async,no_subtree_check is this for wdtv-client?

Also i did read that link a few times, but I didn't really understand it
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: choekstr on March 31, 2010, 04:49:13 AM
No, the server's IP is implied.  These are both client IP's and the permissions and settings for each of the clients.  You would want one IP for just 1 client, or you could go with a whole subnet, a range, etc.  This is all part of the NFS exports format and you can google to find more info on what each of the settings do and if you need them.

For instance, you could have the client Live be ro (read-only) and have your macbook be rw (read-write) with 2 separate entries in the NFSD_AUTO_DEFAULT line.  Or just use * to denote everyone and no per-ip restrictions.
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: sweetvn on March 31, 2010, 05:43:42 AM
@Choekstr

This is how I got my setup to mount NFS
 Live #1 192.168.2.3 (server)
 Live #2 192.168.2.13 (client)

For Live#1 (server) I got this in SS00custom
config_tool -c NFSD=ON
config_tool -c NFSD_AUTO=ON
config_tool -c NFSD_AUTO_DEFAULT='192.168.2.13(rw,async,no_subtree_check)
I also created an "exports" file in the /conf  according to <a href="http://wiki.wdlxtv.com/Sharing_from_OSX"><font color="BLUE">this</font></a><p>
exports:
/tmp/media/usb/USB2/A688982B8897F7CF -ro -mapall=nobody -network 192.168.1 -mask 255.255.255.0

after that set up in Live#1, cold boot

then SSH into Live #2 and
xmount 192.168.2.2:/mnt/HD_a2/NAS  NASnfs nfs
get this same message
mount: 192.168.2.3:/tmp/media/usb/USB2/A688982B8897F7CF failed, reason given by server: Permission denied

I'm missing something but can't quite figure it out, what setup do I need on Live #2 (client)?

I really appreciate your help
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: choekstr on March 31, 2010, 06:09:05 AM
You have 3 IP's: .2, .3, .13 that are shown.

According to your xmount command it is trying mount from a different server, but according to your log message it is trying on the correct machine.  Is this is typo?

You are almost there it looks like.  I would check to make sure the share you are trying to mount is actually shared with a showmount -e 192.168.2.3
It will show you what the share name is so you can put that into your xmount command after the :

Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: sweetvn on March 31, 2010, 08:18:43 PM
You have 3 IP's: .2, .3, .13 that are shown.

According to your xmount command it is trying mount from a different server, but according to your log message it is trying on the correct machine.  Is this is typo?


Yes it is a typos, my xmount is this
# xmount 192.168.2.3:/tmp/media/usb/USB2/A688982B8897F7CF  Upstair nfs
mount: 192.168.2.3:/tmp/media/usb/USB2/A688982B8897F7CF failed, reason given by server: Permission denied

sound like my live #1 server is not sharing the /tmp or i have an issue with the permission



You have 3 IP's: .2, .3, .13 that are shown.

You are almost there it looks like.  I would check to make sure the share you are trying to mount is actually shared with a showmount -e 192.168.2.3
It will show you what the share name is so you can put that into your xmount command after the :



# showmount -e 192.168.2.3
Export list for 192.168.2.3:

It show nothing after 192.168.2.3:

See now when I do this for my NAS
# showmount -e 192.168.2.2
Export list for 192.168.2.2:
/mnt/HD_a2/NAS 192.168.2.12,192.168.2.17,192.168.2.3

my NAS showing correctly what's is sharing /mnt/HD_a2/NAS and the ips it's allowing

but my WDTV server is not doing that

What am I missing here?
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: choekstr on April 01, 2010, 08:58:13 AM
Ok, so we know the problem now: Your server Live is not sharing anything and that is why you are getting a permission error.  Cool.  I am not sure what it takes to get it shared as I don't use this feature.  I personally would dive into the /etc/exports file on the Live and see what is there and create it, do a exportfs -av, get it to share manually. 

I am sure the auto sharing solution works with the right combination but as I don't use that I can't offer much more help on that. 
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: sweetvn on April 01, 2010, 10:40:38 AM
I personally would dive into the /etc/exports file on the Live and see what is there and create it, do a exportfs -av, get it to share manually.  

I am sure the auto sharing solution works with the right combination but as I don't use that I can't offer much more help on that.  

Thanks for your help.  

There is no /etc/exports file, should I create one and put it in there?  Would that mess anything up? I thought I was reading at wikiwdlxtv that to put the exports file in /conf , which i did and not working

I'll try /etc/ see how that's going to turn out
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: b-rad.cc on April 01, 2010, 03:54:42 PM
your /conf/exports file makes no sense. why don't you look up what an exports file is supposed to look like...a hint is that it looks almost exactly like NFSD_AUTO_DEFAULT with the addition of the export at the start of the line.

that and NFSD_AUTO and /conf/exports are not compatible. Its either one or the other.
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: sweetvn on April 01, 2010, 11:55:36 PM
your /conf/exports file makes no sense. why don't you look up what an exports file is supposed to look like...a hint is that it looks almost exactly like NFSD_AUTO_DEFAULT with the addition of the export at the start of the line.

that and NFSD_AUTO and /conf/exports are not compatible. Its either one or the other.

According to this http://www.freeos.com/articles/3421/ (http://www.freeos.com/articles/3421/)

I should have my exports in /etc/exports not /conf/exports
and my exports should be like this
/tmp/media/usb/USB2/A688982B8897F7CF 192.168.2.17(ro)


I got a feeling this is going to work.  Thanks for the tip B-rad

Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: b-rad.cc on April 02, 2010, 06:38:51 AM
i wouldnt go according by anything blindly since we are dealing with a specialized flavour of Linux, designed from the ground up by msyelf...I'd listen to me ;) your exports file goes in /conf and turn off NFSD_AUTO
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: Eugen1968 on April 04, 2010, 09:54:16 PM
I got following message in thesage in the message.txt:
Code: [Select]
Apr  5 04:39:39 WDTVLIVE user.notice S94nfsserver: WDTVLIVE not online, NFSD cannot start!Any idea why can't start NFS server ?
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: golf4life80 on April 05, 2010, 10:57:20 PM
@larsar4
my settings (videos are located in G:\movies in my laptop)

laptop is 192.168.1.2
wdlive is 192.168.1.4

hanewin nfs server exports file ------->   G:\movies 192.168.1.4

telnet command to the Live ------->    xmount 192.168.1.2:/g/movies movies nfs

the "movies" folder then appears in the WD Live "Local drives"

EDIT:
2 things are very important:
1. disable or add permissions to your firewall for the nfs server ports
2. restart the server after changing the exports file, there's a "Restart server" button for this in Hanewin

In need of some help here if anyone can. I've done the setup virtually identical to above, but get this when trying xmount:

# xmount 192.168.2.101:/f/Movies Movies nfs
mkdir: cannot create directory '/tmp/media/usb/Movies': Stale NFS file handle
mount: mounting 192.168.2.101:/f/Movies on /tmp/media/usb/Movies failed: Device or resource busy
rmdir: '/tmp/media/usb/Movies': Device or resource busy

Any ideas? The drive is eSata attached to the PC, and I've tried USB as well, no go.
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: golf4life80 on April 07, 2010, 08:38:35 PM
@larsar4
my settings (videos are located in G:\movies in my laptop)

laptop is 192.168.1.2
wdlive is 192.168.1.4

hanewin nfs server exports file ------->   G:\movies 192.168.1.4

telnet command to the Live ------->    xmount 192.168.1.2:/g/movies movies nfs

the "movies" folder then appears in the WD Live "Local drives"

EDIT:
2 things are very important:
1. disable or add permissions to your firewall for the nfs server ports
2. restart the server after changing the exports file, there's a "Restart server" button for this in Hanewin

In need of some help here if anyone can. I've done the setup virtually identical to above, but get this when trying xmount:

# xmount 192.168.2.101:/f/Movies Movies nfs
mkdir: cannot create directory '/tmp/media/usb/Movies': Stale NFS file handle
mount: mounting 192.168.2.101:/f/Movies on /tmp/media/usb/Movies failed: Device or resource busy
rmdir: '/tmp/media/usb/Movies': Device or resource busy

Any ideas? The drive is eSata attached to the PC, and I've tried USB as well, no go.


Bump. Anyone know?
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: BigBreaker on April 17, 2010, 05:13:06 PM
My NFSD seems to fail also see:

Dec 31 19:00:42 WDTV_LIVE user.info kernel: Installing knfsd (copyright (C) 1996 okir@monad.swb.de).
Dec 31 19:00:42 WDTV_LIVE user.notice S44nfsserver: nfsd failed


I can't get the kernel NFS server to work after many, many hours.  The app.bin version worked like a charm.  What changed?  I have tried every setting the web and these forums have to suggest.  I have tried starting NFSD manually but as b-rad suggests... this is a custom kernel.

I would really like to be able to export my nfs shares FROM the wdtv.  Samba is still slow for me, especially compared to NFS - when it worked.
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: craig0 on April 18, 2010, 06:38:19 PM
Can I ask what wireless dongle and wirless access point you are using?  With my 2.4Ghz band wirless N router (WRT310n) and Belkin USB N-Wifi Dongle I get about 25Mb/sec 40 ft from access point.  This is sharing via NFS.    



Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: BigBreaker on April 20, 2010, 07:47:50 AM
I was getting 48Mb/s under NFS between a rosewill draft-n adapter and an AMC barricade gigamax draft-n router.  After upgrading to the latest firmware I had to drop back to samba at only 16Mb/s.
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: Sandybanks on May 20, 2010, 12:15:37 AM
Can somebody please help me with my stuttering?
I seem to have a NFS problem using ethernet!
Please see info at: http://wdtvforum.com/main/index.php?topic=6168.0
Thx!
Sandybanks
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: TheDodger on May 20, 2010, 12:54:36 PM
@Sandybanks
Why do you crosspost into threads that were started for something else.
And dont give more detailed info about your problem in your thread as requested by dark_wizard.
Nobody can help you if you dont give them more details like filesize, bitrate of your file.
Or you could do a bandwith test, i mean you should know about that feature cause
you posted in this thread.

Sorry, but sometimes.....   ::)
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: tatoosh on August 27, 2011, 08:57:41 AM
the bandwidth_test.sh  is down - can u please reupload it ?
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: recliq on August 30, 2011, 03:33:20 AM
bandwidth_test is included in current versions of WDLXTV.
Title: Re: NFS vs SMB vs FTP vs SSH speed test results
Post by: arfgh on September 10, 2012, 08:51:03 AM

stupid question, how can i execute this script with a gen1 with latest wslxtv firm ?