- WD Community
- News & Assistance
- New to Community
- Forum Feedback
- Software & Apps
- WD Software
- WD Mobile Apps
- Software & Accessory Ideas
- WD TV Live Streaming
- Live Streaming Discussions
- Live Streaming Firmware
- Live Streaming Ideas
- Live Streaming Issues
- WD TV Live Hub
- Hub Discussions
- Hub Firmware
- Hub Themes
- WD TV Live Hub Ideas
- WD TV Live Hub Issue Reporting
- WD TV Play
- WD TV Play
- Live & Live Plus
- Live Discussions
- Live Firmware
- Elements Play
- Elements Play
- External Drives
- Mac Externals
- PC Externals
- Portable Drives
- External Drive Ideas
- Network Devices
- Networking Devices
- Live Duo
- My Book Live
- Other Network Drives
- Network Product Ideas
- Internal Drives
- Desktop & Portable
- Internal Drive Ideas
- Nuevo a La Comunidad
- Los Productos de WD
- Software y Accesorios
- Reproductores Multimedia
- Unidades de Red
- Unidades Externas
- Unidades Internas
- Neu in der Community
- WD Produkte
- WD Programme
- WD TV Media Player
- Netzwerk Laufwerke
- Externe Laufwerke
- Interne Laufwerke
- Annunci e Novita'
- Nuovo per La Comunita'
- Prodotti WD
- Programmi & Accessori
- Riproduttori Multimediali
- Dischi di Rete
- Dischi Esterni
- Dischi Interni
- WD TV Legacy
- Hub Network
- Live Networking
- WD TV HD
- WD TV Mini
- WD Photos
- Other Software & Accessories
- Hard Drives
- WD ShareSpace
- Other Externals
- Other Internal Drives
10-12-2010 07:39 AM
today I read the review of wd sharespace on ixbt site. It says that WD SS have a old Marvell 88F5281 (core ARM, 500 MHz), 2 chips of RAM 128 MB, SATA controller Marvell 88SX7042 and attention!!!! Network subsystem integrated in CPU. I think this is cause of all troubles. Network perfomance goes down when CPU utilization grows up. Tonight I'll take some screens from ssh console during copying files and we`ll see the cpu load.
Cool report. Thank you for the info (no i could not read russian but google translator helps a lot )
Oh my god, seems that we could not get more that that poor network performance....
10-12-2010 09:56 AM
I have been messing about with the Frame sizes on on the WD Sharespace, my switch and PC's ... I have to say the performance varies hugely..
Currently got it set at 9004 on the WD... still maxing out at @10mb/s on transfers from the box though... but much better than it was before at @ 5mb/s ... and I am running the latest firmware..
If its any consulation its faster than my old Terrastion .. although way off what I expected
10-12-2010 10:45 AM - edited 10-13-2010 04:52 AM
i see some difference in specs on nas-central site and ixbt - may be different hardware releases. But as I promise please take attention on screenshot. We can see Putty terminal window from SHARESPACE and executed TOP command, which shows cpu utilization in moment when I copying some file from my laptop to Sharespace. We see that CPU load over 95% by SMBD and KJOURNALD and network perfomance near 7MBytes\s. . NO COMMENTS!!! The CPU of SHARESPACE is too weak!!!
10-12-2010 11:13 AM
So You see that file transfer operation extremly utilize CPU. There is no hope, nothing to wait from WD support !
10-12-2010 11:26 AM
so i bought a new WD Share SPace with 4 TB. The first step bevore create raid ore configure the setting was to update the FW to
2.2.9 with MioNet 220.127.116.11
built on Fri, 18 Jun 2010 18:49:04
After installation was complete i configured my Shared Space with static ip and turend every think off. Only FTP for 1 Folder. And Raid 5
But the Speed inside of GB Network is so bad that is not normal.
The max speed via FTP is 12MB/s upload..... ( no comment )
Upload files via CIF OMG there performance omg....
In my network there are no problems ! i have another NAS from Intel and when i uploade files via FTP to the Intel NAs ui hafe up to 70MB/s.
iam very angry about that bad Speed. A NAS with 12MB/s via FTP is not normal there is my cell phone faster...
10-12-2010 11:41 AM
And again apologize me for my bad english.
Now ive run all test there to run on this WD Sharespace 8TB crap. At my company we run a giga network, our old server i tranfering with a speed of 45-50mb/s, and that old server with linux is from stoneage.
Here is my speeresults om my "Brand new HIGHSPEED WD Sharespace 8TB" server:
Tranfer to thw WD: speed 9,1mb/s
Tranfer from the WD: speed 8,8mb/s
Copy from a folder to another folder on the WD: 4,4mb/s...YES ITS TRUE...4,4mb/s (never done this before so this was even for me a new expiriens, i dident thong i could be slower that the 8,8mb/s but i was...wrong)
Cut and past a file from a folder to another folder on th WD: 4,6mb/s!!!!!!!!!!!
So, HIGHSPEED server "my **bleep**", sory for my bad language, but someone should sue you for missleading ppl
Im feeling cheated! Not to mention all the hours i speende on this pice of crap trying to configure and debug it! Coz as many maný other here, ive got NOTHING absolutly nothing back from trying mail to the support, the onlything they had to say to me was "thats the way it is, we cant do anything about it".
Today i talked again to the shop i bought it from, and i will get my money back, but first they will send my Sharespace to Norway, dont ask me why, for some tests. If they test shows the same results as i told them i will get every penny back.
And then i will buy a new server, but never ever again a server from WD. Not for its prodocts but for their wothless support.
If they cant fix a well known problem in almost two years, they should consider to work with something else and not on the support on a large world wide company as WD.
PS: Ive got the question from the shop i bough my WD from why i bought it since i knew/read that it was a speedproblem with the 2TB and 4TB.
I bought it since in my stupidity i thought that WD, a world wide company, fore sure fixed a problem like that and dident went on selling something that isent work or isent éven near the specifications given on their site.
And here ends my story, now i keep my thumbs that the norwiegans can run the tests ASAP so i can get my money back and buy me a new one,.
The pissed of angry swede
10-12-2010 12:09 PM
And what you think about that? taken from PC-MAG lab: "ShareSpace averaged 11.2 Megabytes per second (MBps). The first test was conducted with RAID 5 redundancy. That's faster than the BlackArmor NAS 220 and the LG N4B1. Changing the hard drive configuration to Stripe yielded slightly faster results: 13.5 MBps. This is one of the fastest NAS appliances I've tested in PCMag Labs."
10-12-2010 03:26 PM - edited 10-12-2010 03:29 PM
offtopic, but .... just now a got unswer from WD support:
I would recommend downloading no more than 3 torrents at 1 time.
Western Digital Service and Support
not use our device in any way you purchase it for - not download torrent not use twonkey, ftp and than may be it will work and may be not
WD put your life on it!!! -funny moto
now I understand
WD put your life on it and your life will be fery funny
you'll wandering every day, spend a lot of time of your life on forums, find new friends like you ........................
10-12-2010 07:12 PM
I purchased a new WD ShareSpace and have configured it. I am on the firmware 2.2.8 and I am also concerned about the file transfer speeds.
Over the weekend, I attempted to transfer approximately 600 GB from my Windows 2003 server to the WD ShareSpace. I started on Friday at 6pm. The copy didn't finish until Monday morning at approximately 9am. That is approximately 63 hours to transfer 600 GB from a Windows 2003 server with 2 GB memory, a Gigabit ethernet card, through a 3m Gigabit switch, to the WD ShareSpace.
In addition, the one-step backup button seems to take 14 hours to backup my default share of that 600 GB. I am performing the backup to a WD MyBook 3.0 device, using the USB cable that came with the MyBook.
When I attempted the firmware upgrade through the web management tool, I also received the Connection Refused message. My firewall is configured to allow all outbound traffic, so I do not believe that the connection issue is on our end. I am thankful now that I didn't upgrade after reading all the posts.
I will go through the motions to log a trouble call into the Support line, but I thought I would add my experience with the transfer speeds to the discussion.