Hi guys,
my infrastructure:
- mac mini i5 2,3ghz 8gb ram
- internal samsung 830 SSD (temp download folder)
- external synology nas ds412+ (4 drives storage, 115MB/s read/write tested over afp)
- osx 10.8.2
- sabnzbd 0.7.4RC1 on the mac
the problem:
- unrar file from internal SSD to NAS -> 50-55MB/s
- unrar same file from internal SSD to same SSD -> 85-90MB/s
- tested with different large files (15-20GB)
- copy the extracted file in finder from SSD to NAS -> 110MB/s
Why is unrar to nas slower than on the same SSD?
Please help!
Slower unrar on Nas than same drive
Forum rules
Help us help you:
Help us help you:
- Are you using the latest stable version of SABnzbd? Downloads page.
- Tell us what system you run SABnzbd on.
- Adhere to the forum rules.
- Do you experience problems during downloading?
Check your connection in Status and Interface settings window.
Use Test Server in Config > Servers.
We will probably ask you to do a test using only basic settings. - Do you experience problems during repair or unpacking?
Enable +Debug logging in the Status and Interface settings window and share the relevant parts of the log here using [ code ] sections.
Re: Slower unrar on Nas than same drive
People have observed this before.
However, the cause is for 100% in unrar, created by rarlab.com
The only extra thing we do is to run it under "nice", to lower the CPU priority of unrar.
Maybe we should add a "special" option to avoid the use of "nice",
so that you can experiment with that.
However, the cause is for 100% in unrar, created by rarlab.com
The only extra thing we do is to run it under "nice", to lower the CPU priority of unrar.
Maybe we should add a "special" option to avoid the use of "nice",
so that you can experiment with that.
Re: Slower unrar on Nas than same drive
That would be great!shypike wrote: Maybe we should add a "special" option to avoid the use of "nice",
so that you can experiment with that.
Re: Slower unrar on Nas than same drive
Forget what I said about the nice option.
If there are no "nice" parameters in Config->Switches, then nice isn't used.
So, it's just unrar itself that is slower in your situation.
If there are no "nice" parameters in Config->Switches, then nice isn't used.
So, it's just unrar itself that is slower in your situation.