Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Best File System For Streaming MP3 Files

Expand Messages
  • bill_steiner2002
    I am using Unslung V2.3R63-uNSLUng-6.8-beta with a EXT3 formatted 500Gig USB SATA drive attached to the Disk 1 port and a 512MB Sandisk mini Cruzer attached to
    Message 1 of 7 , Dec 31, 2007
      I am using Unslung V2.3R63-uNSLUng-6.8-beta with a EXT3 formatted
      500Gig USB SATA drive attached to the Disk 1 port and a 512MB Sandisk
      mini Cruzer attached to Disk 2. I use it primarily
      for streaming music to a music bridge attached to my home
      entertainment system.

      I am using WinAmp 5.5 as the agent to stream the music to a Linksys
      WMB54G Music Bridge.

      My question is, what is the best format (EXT3, FAT32 or NTSF) to use
      on the drive used to store the music files? I currently use EXT3 but
      it seems really slow. I have another USB SATA drive attached to my PC,
      formatted as NTFS with the same selection of songs and that streams
      the songs much faster than the drive attached to the NSLU2. I am not
      sure if the issue is related to the drives format or the ability of
      the NSLU2's ability to process the files.
      Can someone offer me any advice or suggestions?

      Thanks in advance.
    • Bluechip
      First of all remember that your hard drive will ALWAYS be a LOT faster than the USB wire it is talking down, so more important than the speed of your hard
      Message 2 of 7 , Dec 31, 2007
        First of all remember that your hard drive will ALWAYS be a LOT
        faster than the USB wire it is talking down, so more important than
        the speed of your hard drive is the speed of the USB. Then, of
        course, you transfer the data over a 100Mbit network ...which is
        about 20% the speed of USB.

        So long as your hard drive can read data a little faster than
        ethernet can send it, hard drive speed [or rather, data transfer
        thereof] will NOT matter.

        I personally use FAT32 on all my external drives ...FAT32 is really
        crap for: (a) MAASIVE (>4GB) files and (b) milllions of little files
        and probably a whole bunch of other reasons as well (no journalling,
        etc) ...BUT, FAT32 is great for cross-platform compatability ...I
        like that I can unplug my hard drive and connect it to any
        (linux/mac/windoze/BeOS/etc) computer (even my home DVD player) and
        it will "just work"(tm)

        In my experience SaMBa is the culprit for sharing speed ...On my xbox
        it is PAINFUL (although I think this is something to do with XBMC
        too) ...if you can, try a different protocol ...if streaming to XBMC,
        ccxstream is a good option :)

        It sounds like you stream from:
        HDD -usb-> SLUG -e/net-> PC + WinAmp -wireless-> WMB54G
        Maybe you can find software for your slug that will stream direct to
        the linksys?

        BC

        At 16:31 31/12/2007, you wrote:
        >I am using Unslung V2.3R63-uNSLUng-6.8-beta with a EXT3 formatted
        >500Gig USB SATA drive attached to the Disk 1 port and a 512MB Sandisk
        >mini Cruzer attached to Disk 2. I use it primarily
        >for streaming music to a music bridge attached to my home
        >entertainment system.
        >
        >I am using WinAmp 5.5 as the agent to stream the music to a Linksys
        >WMB54G Music Bridge.
        >
        >My question is, what is the best format (EXT3, FAT32 or NTSF) to use
        >on the drive used to store the music files? I currently use EXT3 but
        >it seems really slow. I have another USB SATA drive attached to my PC,
        >formatted as NTFS with the same selection of songs and that streams
        >the songs much faster than the drive attached to the NSLU2. I am not
        >sure if the issue is related to the drives format or the ability of
        >the NSLU2's ability to process the files.
        >Can someone offer me any advice or suggestions?
        >
        >Thanks in advance.
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
      • ragacycle
        ... Do you know why when I run hdparm on my attached PATA drive in a USB2.0 enclosure the speed from hdparm on the slug is 8.5 MBps while from my desktop it s
        Message 3 of 7 , Dec 31, 2007
          --- In nslu2-linux@yahoogroups.com, Bluechip <csbluechip@...> wrote:
          >
          > First of all remember that your hard drive will ALWAYS be a LOT
          > faster than the USB wire it is talking down, so more important than
          > the speed of your hard drive is the speed of the USB. Then, of
          > course, you transfer the data over a 100Mbit network ...which is
          > about 20% the speed of USB.
          >
          > So long as your hard drive can read data a little faster than
          > ethernet can send it, hard drive speed [or rather, data transfer
          > thereof] will NOT matter.

          Do you know why when I run hdparm on my attached PATA drive in a
          USB2.0 enclosure the speed from hdparm on the slug is 8.5 MBps while
          from my desktop it's closer to 30 MBps ?

          This is with unslung firmware: V2.3R63-uNSLUng-6.8-beta.

          best,
          Alasdair
        • Jon Smirl
          ... I just tried this with my own desktop/NSLU2 pair and there is quite a difference. This isn t a problem with the file system on the device. I get
          Message 4 of 7 , Dec 31, 2007
            On 12/31/07, ragacycle <alcoheca@...> wrote:
            > --- In nslu2-linux@yahoogroups.com, Bluechip <csbluechip@...> wrote:
            > >
            > > First of all remember that your hard drive will ALWAYS be a LOT
            > > faster than the USB wire it is talking down, so more important than
            > > the speed of your hard drive is the speed of the USB. Then, of
            > > course, you transfer the data over a 100Mbit network ...which is
            > > about 20% the speed of USB.
            > >
            > > So long as your hard drive can read data a little faster than
            > > ethernet can send it, hard drive speed [or rather, data transfer
            > > thereof] will NOT matter.
            >
            > Do you know why when I run hdparm on my attached PATA drive in a
            > USB2.0 enclosure the speed from hdparm on the slug is 8.5 MBps while
            > from my desktop it's closer to 30 MBps ?
            >
            > This is with unslung firmware: V2.3R63-uNSLUng-6.8-beta.


            I just tried this with my own desktop/NSLU2 pair and there is quite a
            difference. This isn't a problem with the file system on the device.

            I get 34.70MB/sec for cached reads (278Mb/sec). The link is capable of
            480Mb/sec. So that is a 50% loss somewhere. Some is lost in protocol
            overhead but not 50%.

            For buffered reads I see 9.51MB/sec. I know the disk is capable of 40MB/sec.

            Most likely explanation for the drop from 40MB to 9.51MB is the tiny
            microcontroller in the USB disk enclosure. It may not be fast enough.
            Another likely culprit is that the NSLU2 is too slow to keep up with
            the revolutions of the disk and is being forced to wait for another
            revolution before the sector reappears. I don't know how hdparm
            requests its IO, is it one big request or lots of little ones?

            Anyway, all of this is way, way faster than MP3's need by 100x. If you
            are having trouble playing MP3's (100% CPU) most likely your player
            software is trying to use floating point and you need to switch to one
            that is implemented using fixed point. The NSLU2 does not have an FPU.
            mpd has a fixed point implementation.


            >
            > best,
            > Alasdair
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >


            --
            Jon Smirl
            jonsmirl@...
          • Sam
            ... Sandisk ... PC, ... Definately look at seeing if you can stream straight to the device, if ineeded, you are doing like samba to a pc then winamp to the
            Message 5 of 7 , Jan 1, 2008
              --- In nslu2-linux@yahoogroups.com, "bill_steiner2002" <bsdaiwa@...>
              wrote:
              >
              > I am using Unslung V2.3R63-uNSLUng-6.8-beta with a EXT3 formatted
              > 500Gig USB SATA drive attached to the Disk 1 port and a 512MB
              Sandisk
              > mini Cruzer attached to Disk 2. I use it primarily
              > for streaming music to a music bridge attached to my home
              > entertainment system.
              >
              > I am using WinAmp 5.5 as the agent to stream the music to a Linksys
              > WMB54G Music Bridge.
              >
              > My question is, what is the best format (EXT3, FAT32 or NTSF) to use
              > on the drive used to store the music files? I currently use EXT3 but
              > it seems really slow. I have another USB SATA drive attached to my
              PC,
              > formatted as NTFS with the same selection of songs and that streams
              > the songs much faster than the drive attached to the NSLU2. I am not
              > sure if the issue is related to the drives format or the ability of
              > the NSLU2's ability to process the files.
              > Can someone offer me any advice or suggestions?
              >
              > Thanks in advance.
              >

              Definately look at seeing if you can stream straight to the device,
              if ineeded, you are doing like samba to a pc then winamp to the device

              I helped someone on IRC who was having similar problems, and it
              seeming slow. De-underclocking the unit, and switching to using
              TwonkyMedia to stream straight to the device made it a lot quicker



              http://www.nslu2-linux.org/wiki/HowTo/SlugAsAudioPlayer

              May be of interest to you
            • Alasdair Campbell
              ... No trouble playing MP3s, I m just a little surprised with what I read about the NSLU2 being a good performer with data transfers. I was hoping the bottle
              Message 6 of 7 , Jan 1, 2008
                Jon Smirl wrote:
                >
                >
                > On 12/31/07, ragacycle <alcoheca@...
                > <mailto:alcoheca%40googlemail.com>> wrote:
                > > --- In nslu2-linux@yahoogroups.com
                > <mailto:nslu2-linux%40yahoogroups.com>, Bluechip <csbluechip@...> wrote:
                > > >
                > > > First of all remember that your hard drive will ALWAYS be a LOT
                > > > faster than the USB wire it is talking down, so more important than
                > > > the speed of your hard drive is the speed of the USB. Then, of
                > > > course, you transfer the data over a 100Mbit network ...which is
                > > > about 20% the speed of USB.
                > > >
                > > > So long as your hard drive can read data a little faster than
                > > > ethernet can send it, hard drive speed [or rather, data transfer
                > > > thereof] will NOT matter.
                > >
                > > Do you know why when I run hdparm on my attached PATA drive in a
                > > USB2.0 enclosure the speed from hdparm on the slug is 8.5 MBps while
                > > from my desktop it's closer to 30 MBps ?
                > >
                > > This is with unslung firmware: V2.3R63-uNSLUng-6.8-beta.
                >
                > I just tried this with my own desktop/NSLU2 pair and there is quite a
                > difference. This isn't a problem with the file system on the device.
                >
                > I get 34.70MB/sec for cached reads (278Mb/sec). The link is capable of
                > 480Mb/sec. So that is a 50% loss somewhere. Some is lost in protocol
                > overhead but not 50%.
                >
                > For buffered reads I see 9.51MB/sec. I know the disk is capable of 40MB/sec.
                >
                > Most likely explanation for the drop from 40MB to 9.51MB is the tiny
                > microcontroller in the USB disk enclosure. It may not be fast enough.
                > Another likely culprit is that the NSLU2 is too slow to keep up with
                > the revolutions of the disk and is being forced to wait for another
                > revolution before the sector reappears. I don't know how hdparm
                > requests its IO, is it one big request or lots of little ones?
                >

                No trouble playing MP3s, I'm just a little surprised with what I read
                about the NSLU2 being a good performer with data transfers. I was hoping
                the bottle neck to be the 100Mbps Ethernet link, otherwise why bother
                with the high speed usb 2.0 controller in the slug's design?

                The enclosure was used for both hdparm tests so unless I'm mistaken that
                can't be a factor.

                However... I've hijacked this thread so perhaps I should do more
                research and post a new message if needs. hdparm is actually spitting
                out some rubbish when I run it without any switches

                happy new year
              • Shane Kerr
                All, ... I also found Samba to be slow. For Linux clients connecting to the NSLU2 I use NFS for file sharing - performance is a lot better. I run Samba at the
                Message 7 of 7 , Jan 2, 2008
                  All,

                  On Mon, Dec 31, 2007 at 05:27:18PM +0000, Bluechip wrote:
                  >
                  > In my experience SaMBa is the culprit for sharing speed ...On my
                  > xbox it is PAINFUL (although I think this is something to do with
                  > XBMC too) ...if you can, try a different protocol ...if streaming to
                  > XBMC, ccxstream is a good option :)

                  I also found Samba to be slow. For Linux clients connecting to the
                  NSLU2 I use NFS for file sharing - performance is a lot better. I run
                  Samba at the same time for sharing to Windows clients.

                  --
                  Shane
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.