or FreeBSD.
but the apps?
Also, if you’re making bank:
Call Allan Jude
Do ZFS tuning - if you can afford it or think that it’s useful.
These are German listings. Assuming you run 3.5 drives. Put SSDs in the head unit to act as cache drives. Problems gone.
all that old stuff will only work in North America.
Europe needs to run on NVMe and low-power solutions.
All of which cost money
its conventient for things if you dont have fulltime IT staff.. ugh .
idc about apps, yea should have yoloed it and went full cray cray , so
yea just bought it wont be able to switch to anything else, but thats ok - the tiny shit thats flame project data can just live on literally anything
i jsut wanted to “keep it together” for backups, but given the state of shit that flame is in in regards to that I have to rely on archives.
you’re not alone…
we’re all trying to work this stupid shit out
or we’re just ignoring it and pretending that working from home in your undies is the way forward…
1 Like
Just to add to this and contribute…
Yep, I have a NetApp 24bay disk shelf and I run TrueNas on it. Been pretty solid for a while, i’m about to buy a second disk shelf. Next step is Centralized Server, but there are just a couple of things I don’t quite understand yet… but yep, pretty solid, stable and fast.
40GbE network cards - 40GbE switch - 40GbE optic cables - MTU 9000 (it really helps) - Cache disks - NFS v4 share.
I’d like to see how the supermicro rockylinux minimal raid storage is configured with XFS as Allan has said before. ZFS is good but performance is slower than XFS as far as I have seen.
1 Like
i am planning of going 25Gbit to clients and then will do MTU9000 - but thats all for “media” i just need a place for “project home” i guess, which apparently isnt my bonkers fast qnap (24*NVME u.2 .. its flipping FAST AF) so there is that, ill build somethign from scraps with raid1 NVMEs and call it a day probably … like this isnt hard to do, it just feels so weird having everything spread around machines
rather than resolve where its like here is the database i am happy now
even though I don’t think the Synology or Qnap style appliance are appropriate for our type of work, it shouldn’t be this hard, and I really believe something else is going.
2 Likes
yea.. i have a call with ADSK on the 22nd , lets see if they can tell me wtf is happening , as soon as i put project home on qnap → bad
and the Qnap is a raw NFS mount to the storage? No VM in the middle? Also, try with NFSv4. Minimal mount options. But if your iperf Mac ←→ Qnap, test both directions, is fucked up, then resolve that first.
zfs mirrors should be the only pool type. YMMV and life is short so this won’t be the hill that i die on.
iperf is fine between mac and qnap
qnap is raw nfs mount, yea i can read write to it with like 10GB/s with 100Gbit direct connect -.- like this stuff is fast , i am trying a second qnap now and there doesnt seem to be any stupid warnings, so maybe its something weird
Not sure if your case but… Once upon a time I had slow save times and it was JUST the permissions settings on the truenas (in this case ACL permissions)
1 Like
Although I think there is a huge amount of improvement to Flame that should happen in regards to the complex infrastructure it requires, this issue really seems like a configuration issue on the Qnap.
1 Like
Just writing this down because its confusing:
same issue between linux and mac clients, doesnt matter apparently
→ Project server runs on proxmox
→ proxmox has all-nvme (12x 2TB)
→ Qnap has a NFS share with sync on (24x 4TB NVMEs) with 100Gbit/s to the network
→ Qnap2 is a small qnap with 5x M.2 NVMES and only 10Gbit
→ “project home” = Project server = slow saves
→ “project home” = Qnap = Fast saves - but - I cant save timeline resizes, just getting a bunch of errors.
→ “project home” = Qnap2 = Fast saves - no other issues?
→ “project home” on random 2.5 Gbit intel nuc with random ssd → fast and no issues to report .
the thing is, the qnap is dumb, there isnt much in terms of “settings” to configure wrong 
- what OS is on the NUC
- what are the NFS export options.
- what are the permissions on the directory
- how are you mounting that on Flame workstation side.
I have no experience with Qnap, a little bit with Synology. Assuming there are similarities, NFS sharing on the Synology was clusterfucky.
Your tests do clearly show though, that the Qnap is the issue.
- Ubuntu
- rw, sync
- 777
- fstab , nothing special at all just mount and done .
yea qnap seems to be the issue, somehow.. very weird
i need to sleep been at this for like 18hours straight today i cant think anymore …
i might be going nuts, maybe the issue is ineed just any Project that the mac touches on the qnap .
i honestly dont have a clue how to get nfs v4 to work on a mac, i am not installing these insane nfs tools,
Check the mounts on Mac… It might be using NFSv4 with the Ubuntu server, and NFSv3 from the Qnaps, and that is a big difference, which could account for the issues you are seeing.
It is possible the Qnap is not serving NFSv4 at all, or it might be a special option. I think Synology works that way.
Super quick googling produces this. v4, as expected is an optional toggle.
i think macOS clients are idiotic and dont support V4 proper, and autodesk wrote “please dont use v4 cries
ill give that a try tomorrow, i have v4 active on the qnap but no clue how to Mount it on the macs using v4 .
but its weird, didnt autodesk specifically say to NOT use v4 due to corruption issues?