D-Link Forums
The Graveyard - Products No Longer Supported => D-Link Storage => DNS-323 => Topic started by: shadowsports on October 22, 2010, 09:24:19 AM
-
Greetings,
Just picked this up last night. I'm running a 323 with a single 2TB Seagate.
Setup:
DNS323 f/w 1.09
Disk: Seagate ST320005N4A1S-RK P/N: 9TN158-510
2TB Barracuda LP 32mb cache 5900RPM
Before purchase I read as much as I could about the box, checked the reviews, played with the emulator and looked at QVL for certified disks. Since the 1.5 was listed and firmware notes stated 2TB support in 1.09, I took the plunge.
I was not able to find a unit with 1.09 f/w installed, so I started with 1.07. Put the drive in, but skipped formatting when I powered on and logged in the first time. I noted that the box appeared to correctly detect the disk out of the box, but I flashed to 1.09 anyway. Formatting standard disk Ext3 took under 30 min. Set my static IP, changed network name, shutdown and moved the box onto my network. Powered up, working great with XP, Vista and W7.
Looking at Addons now, but like others have mentioned, I can't seem to find descriptions/release notes of what each one does, so I may poke around and do more searching here.
Haven't added anything significant to the disk, as I am planning to add a second for RAID 1. Also adding a printer. Thus far, my out of box experience has been good. Hope this helps others who might be on the fence about using the 323 with 2TB Seagates.
-
the DNS-323 is a really good device for its price...
For the way I use it; FTP, backup, movie streaming to WDTV Live and Xbox360
I never had a major problem, or a small problem that I was not able to fix in a couple of minutes.
Keep in mind That i never tried Torrents, funplug, the "automated" backup, Raid 0 or 1
got 2 x 1TB volumes
the only downside for me was the speed.... its to slow for my taste
that why I got a Synology DS-210+ that is a lot more expensive, but has easyly 5x times the speed
when transfering files from and to the NAS.
-
The Synology ds210j was my first choice, but I was on a buget. My first home NAS was a Linksys nas200 w/ 1TB of storage. I filled it up fairly quickly, and it's still in service. The max sustained throughput on the nas200 is only 6-7mb with a non-journaled file system. It is severely under powered both in processing and memory. Good basic storage in it's day. Today it's end of life and hardly supported.
In comparison, the 323 has a more robust feature set and is at least twice as fast. I've hooked up a HP laser printer to it which had been sitting in the corner of my office for over a year. The fact the D-Link is pumping out firmware and support for more features made this a perfect purchase for me.
-
I had my laser printer connected to the DNS-323, but it turns out that Windows 7, at least the 64 bit version, has a memory leak in the LPD driver. Spooler was taking 2GB of memory one day, and I could watch it with nothing happening, ant it gradually incremented itself up 4k at a time.
I have the laser printer connected to a router running DD-WRT, works like a champ now.
-
Saw yours and replies from others regarding the mem leak in w7. I'm sure this thing is going to be quirky. Doing some testing this morning. Back ups, etc. I like Acronis True Image for this. Later today, I'm going to copy one of the drives in my old NAS to the 323. Should give me a feel for the kind of performance I can expect going forward.
-
This is one I don't think I can blame on D-Link, it worked fine with XP, it wasn't until I moved to Win7 that the LPD issue suddenly came up.
-
Are there different drivers available for your LP? Have you tried using one a little older or newer (if available) for your device. May not change anything, but may be worth a try?
-
You're probably missing the point. It's not the printer driver that's the issue, it's the LPD support in Windows 7. I tried two totally different printers, both had the same issue under Windows 7.
-
I see. That's a bummer. I'll have to watch for that on my w7 iTunes box.
I set up FTP last night and am testing remotely today, using my browser. I am really liking this little box!
-
gunrunnerjohn -
I noticed your signature says :
"... PS: RAID of any level is NOT a second copy."
I am missing something here. I thought "RAID 1 " *IS* literally getting a second copy -
that whenever I write a file to disk #1, the RAID controller writes a 2nd copy to Disk#2.
In fact, that IS my backup arrangement, and I thought I was OK.
Can you please set me straight?
Thanks,
Michael
-
gunrunnerjohn -
I noticed your signature says :
"... PS: RAID of any level is NOT a second copy."
I am missing something here. I thought "RAID 1 " *IS* literally getting a second copy -
that whenever I write a file to disk #1, the RAID controller writes a 2nd copy to Disk#2.
In fact, that IS my backup arrangement, and I thought I was OK.
Can you please set me straight?
Thanks,
Michael
Yes, in RAID1 the data is mirrored over both drives. The point is though, should you accidentally delete files or have a virus take them out, or perhaps you overwrite a file by accident- you don't have a second copy. RAID only provides you with continuing access in case of a drive failure.
We say so many times that it's important to have proper backups.