I am looking for recommendation for NAS in a MacOS based 2 system Flame environment. For unmanaged media, simple push-pull file sharing on a 10GE network. Currently using a Synology NAS but recently started to have frequent disconnect issues.
I donāt do Mac.
What if we were to sweeten the deal with some designer underpants?
just for unmanaged media i dont have issues with my qnap.
Wouldnt recommend running projectserver , shared anything workflows.
Frequent disconnection issues sounds like more of some kind of network issue thoā¦ i would see if you can trace that down before you invest in new hardware , but otherwise i am happy with my all-NVME qnap..
I like my Truenas Mini Rās. For $2,500, ya get a 12bay chassis, a PCIe slot, 32GB of RAM. Plus they are fecking silent.
Buy 2. Primary/secondary.
Look online for Bob Zelin heās the symbology genius and will sort it out.
If you have a hardware issue with your Synology box, Iād still recommend buying another. Donāt give up on Synology (the brand). Although they rarely (if ever) update their āfeature appsā, the core boxes are pretty darn stable for what they do.
I have two Mac Flames & two Windows machines on 10 GbE with a Synology DS1819+, 8 HDs, no Caches, SMB. It runs great in the same environment youāre describing. It runs 24/7 and backs up current projects from the workstations every night without fail.
Iāve had my Synology for more than 8 years without issues. If youāre getting frequent disconnects thatās likely something else contributing.
The scenario where my Synology disconnects in recent memory when the poorly written Blackmagic Cloud sync hammers the network and takes up all the air in the room. Doesnāt happen with Lucid Link.
Try correlate with network traffic spikes.
Or could be a bad cable or port.
Unlikely to be a systemic issue.
Thanks everyone for all of the valuable input and advise. I was also thinking that the switch could be the cause of the problem and are looking for a replacement. The two things that drove my initial inquiry were the feedback I received from Synology and Autodesk. Autodesk recommends NFS, while Synology does not officially sanctions NFS for Mac OS. This seemed conflicting to me. The other was the timing of the problem. It coincided with recent OS and app upgrades.
you dont have to use NFS for media access. only for shared cache and shared project server both i wouldnt not recommend you to do anyhow.
you need to do a lot of weird things on the mac side to make that happen. (and even then it doesnt work tbh)
if its just fast media-storage for unmanaged workflows SMB is fine.
@finnjaeger
Thanks for confirming, We were using SMB for years until recently an Autodesk support engineer said that we should use NFS.
its much slower under macOS fwiw , and just to iterate
shared cache or āframestoreā and project data needs to be on NFS 100%
the regular ānasā type storage , it does not matter. flame is not doing crazy things with it, just reading data and on macOS SMB is much better than NFS for that stuff.
We have a synology and I agree with @finnjaeger about using SMB. But on some of our macs, NFS is faster because of the network cards (donāt get me started on the horrible driver support on mac). Recently, some machines mounting the synology via NFS started hanging up and we got this error in the Flame terminal console:
nfs server 192.XXX.XX.XXX:/volume1/synology: lockd not responding
Donāt know why this started happeningā¦we didnāt update anything on the Synology side. Anyways, you can bypass the file lock daemon by putting ānolockā in the mount options. I dimly remember that maybe our linux Flame had this problem years ago and I saw the ānolockā option on that machine and we havenāt had any issues on that box. Our reseller probably put that in when they did the install.
Next time when we upgrade our storage, Iām going to pass on getting another Synology. The CLI tools are not standard linux, they still require Synology approved drives (which you can circumvent with a hack), and thereās cheaper options out there now.
That being saidā¦I have to admit itās been rock solid, but time to move on.
Hi Finn,
Do you know is it okay to create, append and restore from Flame Archives over SMB?
ive had no issues with that.
Personally would not recommend archiving or appending to a Flame archive over SMB/CIFS.
Can you elaborate?
Iāve done it many times and never had an issue.
Is there a specific issue like lack of hard links, or just the general āsmb isnāt as good as NFSā vibe?
Agreeing with allklier hereā¦..all OSes, years of archiving/appending/restoring via SMB/CIFS 10Gb fiber without any issues. Curious what issues youāve enounteredā¦?
The NFS dependencies are not related to archives.
They are best guess recommendations for active project setups and media cche.