Installing a compression program in DNS-323 and

[MadwolfNemesis]

I had manged to use my USB port for my portable hard disk...

However, I realised the transfer rate is very slow from my DNS-323 to the attached USB Storage.

Also, when I want to mass copy files/folders, it would take far too long. I have a few questions:

1) Are we able to run command scripts direct to DNS-323 and not use telnet? Because if I were to use telnet, if the commands were to take 10 hours, my computer would need to be on for 10 hours and that is not productive.

2) Are we able to install a compression application that could "zip" all the files that I want to copy remotely at the DNS-323 server?

Please kindly advise. Thank you.

[shadowandy]

I had manged to use my USB port for my portable hard disk...

However, I realised the transfer rate is very slow from my DNS-323 to the attached USB Storage.

Also, when I want to mass copy files/folders, it would take far too long. I have a few questions:

1) Are we able to run command scripts direct to DNS-323 and not use telnet? Because if I were to use telnet, if the commands were to take 10 hours, my computer would need to be on for 10 hours and that is not productive.

2) Are we able to install a compression application that could "zip" all the files that I want to copy remotely at the DNS-323 server?

Please kindly advise. Thank you.

1) Yes you can. Or you can do something as simple as running it in background using nohup and &

2) There is already tar in the DNS-323. Google for "man tar" to find out how to use it.

[AS1]

has the dns-323 always been so slow?

i worry the price drop is because some components may have been substituted to compete with others offerings.

[shadowandy]

has the dns-323 always been so slow?

i worry the price drop is because some components may have been substituted to compete with others offerings.


Using the usb port for usb storage device is not what the DNS-323 was designed for. The usb-storage.ko was compiled by 3rd party developers and has debug messages enabled resulting in slower performance.

If you use the DNS-323 without using those fun_plug and additional stuffs, performance should be within specifications.

[AS1]

Using the usb port for usb storage device is not what the DNS-323 was designed for. The usb-storage.ko was compiled by 3rd party developers and has debug messages enabled resulting in slower performance.

If you use the DNS-323 without using those fun_plug and additional stuffs, performance should be within specifications.
so if all one needs is network file sharing then can get something like the below?

http://www.belkin.com/networkusbhub/images/netHub_bboard.jpg
http://www.belkin.com/networkusbhub/

then simply plug in printers and hdds and so on.

[shadowandy]

so if all one needs is network file sharing then can get something like the below?

http://www.belkin.com/networkusbhub/images/netHub_bboard.jpg
http://www.belkin.com/networkusbhub/

then simply plug in printers and hdds and so on.

It will depends on needs. If you just need simple device sharing, probably that would suffice. As for speed wise, as long as you don't do what it was not originally designed for, it should perform within specs.

[MadwolfNemesis]

1) Yes you can. Or you can do something as simple as running it in background using nohup and &

2) There is already tar in the DNS-323. Google for "man tar" to find out how to use it.

Hey, thanks for the info...

at least something for me to google and wiki more...

Thanks!

[shadowandy]

Hey, thanks for the info...

at least something for me to google and wiki more...

Thanks!

try using usb-storage.ko from http://www.domaigne.com/download/dns-323/ and see if it works better,

[richneo]

so if all one needs is network file sharing then can get something like the below?

http://www.belkin.com/networkusbhub/

then simply plug in printers and hdds and so on.
nas is totaly different from this

dns-323 has never been slowed as claimed by you. Have you tried linksys' media hub or their nas200? that is what you called slow not dns-323.

i dont fault you for promoting belkin because you are their promoter but i think to waste money on this usb hub, its better to buy dir-655/825/855 and use the usb port as usb hub using the shareport. just connect a sub hub to the usb port on dir-655/825/855 and expand the usb port and share your harddisk, printer, scanners thumbdrives and etc on the network

http://global.dlink.com.sg/site_img/sg_wireless.jpg

[AS1]

nas is totaly different from this

dns-323 has never been slowed as claimed by you. Have you tried linksys' media hub or their nas200? that is what you called slow not dns-323.

i dont fault you for promoting belkin because you are their promoter but i think to waste money on this usb hub, its better to buy dir-655/825/855 and use the usb port as usb hub using the shareport. just connect a sub hub to the usb port on dir-655/825/855 and expand the usb port and share your harddisk, printer, scanners thumbdrives and etc on the network

just asking shadowandy for pov on the network hub. If not using the features of the nas like torrent and such, would the network hub be an alternative?

i have been promoter for lots of brands just that when i did for belkin last show, the network hub was pretty intriguing because simply plug into any router ethernet port and you have 5 useable usb ports for just about any gadget like printer or external storage using usb that can be shared within the network. $99 from comex price.

that means, if the router has 4 ethernet ports and one network hub to each port, its like 20 network devices to be shared with the users.

Didnt ask the man whether if connect a 16 port switch to the router and each port connected to a network hub, will it actually detect 75 shared devices...75 external hdds siao liao. Imagine opening My Computer to have 70+ hdds appear...:D

Shareport on the other hand is one gadget at any one time (so far since one usb port) as far as i know.

Since you appear versatile in dlink tech, can the shareport connect to normal usb hub and then connect all the gadgets so that hub so that users can access all simultaneously? So supposedly if have 16 port usb hub, can work also in such a configuration?

[shadowandy]

I think daisy chaining the usb hub may work but need to consider stuffs like power. That time saw a 49 port usb hub and that requires a PSU of its own.

[liangtam]

The belkin network hub is just like dlink shareport in implementation. The only difference is that the features in inbuilt to the dlink sets, and hence less external components and power adapter to crowd ur living space.

BTW, you are really exaggerating. Firstly, why do you need to have 70hdds connected when there are obvious bottleneck in such devices, especially in RAM implementation? Also, what makes you think the Belkin network hub is not a single usb controller with inbuilt usb hub inside the device?

[AS1]

The belkin network hub is just like dlink shareport in implementation. The only difference is that the features in inbuilt to the dlink sets, and hence less external components and power adapter to crowd ur living space.

BTW, you are really exaggerating. Firstly, why do you need to have 70hdds connected when there are obvious bottleneck in such devices, especially in RAM implementation? Also, what makes you think the Belkin network hub is not a single usb controller with inbuilt usb hub inside the device?
thats why it is intriguing...if i had needed such a gadget or have surplus $$$, would have gotten one to experiment with.

i think i will shoot an email to belkin asking if the network hub can be connected to a switch. I doubt consumer routers will efficiently be able to handle traffic of 70+ hdds (devices) being accessed at once but if it can be done on a smaller scale, does sound cheaper for people who do not need NAS other functions.

[liangtam]

You're not getting the point

Its not about whether if the device can handle 70 hdds or not. This can be done easily on even 1 USB port on either the belkin or dlink with many usb hub daisy chained and doing a dual-track power supply - in theory.

And lets assume another point. Assuming the network hub is $99, and another router somewhere between $40-300+.
A 1T1R N router + belkin network hub being ~$150.
Aztech HW550-3G $79
DIR-655 $170

Why might I not topup another $20 for a gigabit WAN/LAN router instead?
Or a full 2T2R Aztech router in this case? It is still more superior in terms of hardware compared to the pairing that you have suggested

[AS1]

You're not getting the point

Its not about whether if the device can handle 70 hdds or not. This can be done easily on even 1 USB port on either the belkin or dlink with many usb hub daisy chained and doing a dual-track power supply - in theory.

And lets assume another point. Assuming the network hub is $99, and another router somewhere between $40-300+.
A 1T1R N router + belkin network hub being ~$150.
Aztech HW550-3G $79
DIR-655 $170

Why might I not topup another $20 for a gigabit WAN/LAN router instead?
Or a full 2T2R Aztech router in this case? It is still more superior in terms of hardware compared to the pairing that you have suggested
You are saying another thing while i saying another thing. The network hub works as an addition to the present network in which a NAS may not be needed.

Simplest reason is the user too lazy or not so IT saavy to reconfigure everything from doing the port forwarding to mac filtering to even re-doing the encryption on the wireless devices to suit new router. I`d rather recommend them to get repeater-capable routers (or powerline solution if needed) instead which by now is a pretty cost effective option.

as for the topping up of $20...still doesnt solve the fact that still need a hub of some sort to connect the various gadgets so still need to buy a powered hub which costs about $30 average. The combination may work better but in the end is the same thing in function as a $20-ish G router + $99 network hub. depends on the requirements of the user.

with the network hub...basically no need to change router to one that has shareport technology or similar so can just add on to the network to share devices. A router whether wired or wireless can be used. Pretty convenient.

[MadwolfNemesis]

After reading all the threads, I realised that having a USB Hub connected to a single usb port on a router would suffice for many.

Anyway, I didn't realise that I can use the usb port on my dlink's router! Cool! If I connect my computer via lan, i wonder if the transfer rate would be faster than my dns-323

[richneo]

you using dir 655?

[shadowandy]

After reading all the threads, I realised that having a USB Hub connected to a single usb port on a router would suffice for many.

Anyway, I didn't realise that I can use the usb port on my dlink's router! Cool! If I connect my computer via lan, i wonder if the transfer rate would be faster than my dns-323


One thing to take note is that a NAS offers basic folder access control which a network USB hub might not be able to offer. If the files are usually free for all, t hen a network USB hub works.

[MadwolfNemesis]

you using dir 655?

Ya, I'm using a 655. I did an estimated calculation on my dns-323's usb port speed. It's about 2Mb/s. If I plug my portable hdd into my 655 and have my laptop connected via LAN, would I get a transfer rate above that? By norm, I get about 6-7 Mb/s if I were to pull files from my dns onto my laptop via lan.

[richneo]

Ya, I'm using a 655. I did an estimated calculation on my dns-323's usb port speed. It's about 2Mb/s. If I plug my portable hdd into my 655 and have my laptop connected via LAN, would I get a transfer rate above that? By norm, I get about 6-7 Mb/s if I were to pull files from my dns onto my laptop via lan.
when i tried measure the speed of my thumbdrive connected to dir-655 or direct to my desktop, i get around 3 to 4 megabyte per second.

the bottle neck is in my sandisk cruzer micro skin