I had recently submitted an idea to be able to backup the entire EX4 on a schedule, instead of setting up each individual folder, and then manually kicking off the backup. The idea was rejected by WDC, stating they would not support that feature on the EX series. I hope that was a mistake - really you won't support the function to backup the entire device on a schedule? If that is the case I will have no use for this device, and will need to purchase a different unit. Please WDC, make this happen.
I'm using My Cloud drive and I've created a public media share that I'm using to store music, pictures, and videos. I need this to be public so various devices (TV, xbox, etc) can access it but that means that anyone on my network (friends, family) could accidentally delete everything in that share. I'd like to set guest access as read only on that share to prevent that.
It seems like it would be fairly easy to add a guest read only flag to the dashboard GUI since I believe this maps directly to the samba config keyword "read only = yes" (or writeable = no) which is already part of the /etc/samba/overall_share file. I tried setting this option (via ssh) and it does work (it makes it read only), however the valid login list (write list field) is being ignored for some reason so if I set read only to yes, then I can't write to the share even though I connect to it as a user in the writeable list. Not sure why that's the case...
I am using my EX4 as more storage for my backup server. I'm doing disk to disk backups, and then disk to cloud with a 3rd party.
My disk to disk is something I built, which has a few other people using it for fairly large setups. It's simply rsync with hard linking between incrementals. I'm not sure if hard linking is working at all with Samba though. I'm bouncing between projects here like a mad man.
To give SMB access to my previous NFS share, I had to do the following. It would be good to see these as options or changes in future firmwares, so I don't have to do it manually in the shell. I had to grant root access to samba, because I back up almost everything, and they can be owned by any local user. If I back up the entire filesystem, lots of files are owned by root (obviously), so Samba allowing root is essential. It would be a nightmare to restore and guess at ownerships for every file on the system.
I gave this disclaimer on my post, so you guys will (hopefully) not get support requests for changes I mentioned.
"Note to everyone else. Don't do any of this. I had to log in via SSH and manipulate things directly. I'm a professional, and take all liability for my own mistakes."
If I can be of any more help, feel free to email me. I believe admins can see my email address on my profile. If you're at WD and can't get my email, get with me and we'll figure it out. I'm sure this is all clear enough for anyone building the firmware. If you want me to try something in my environment, I'm willing to consider it. I work with this stuff all day every day, so I generally know if a change is dangerous.
There's a bug with my changes. I can read all the root-only files now. I can't write to anything. I'm back in to fix that. I'm sure it's one stupid flag. samba.conf can be annoying.
1) Allow the user root to be accessed via the user panel, and add it to the smbpasswd file.
Obviously the local user root already exists. I added it to the smbpasswd file with: smbpasswd -a root
And I also set the local user password with: passwd root
2) Make root a valid option as a user to be allowed to the share. Allow root to be added to the valid users list.
3) Change /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_* . 1000 is way too low with 16TB. After the firmware update, it wanted to rebuild the array, and will take 11 days. I changed them to 99999999 (arbitrarily high number) . Now it claims 2.54 days. That could be catastrophic if someone had flaky power. We've been having short power outages here, but the UPSs stayed up the whole time. If we had a long outage and the generator didn't kick on (or if I was an average home user) dropping power during a rebuild could fail the array. I don't think you want to try to explain over the phone to a novice user how to reassemble a failed array.
4) I would have liked it if you had built busybox with chattr. Tell whoever builds it, they'll understand. I wanted to "chattr +i smb.conf", so nothing would accidentally change my settings back. I already tested, and if i make any unrelated changes, it reverts them to your settings. I made a backup, so it won't be a big deal if it changes in the future.
I only got the EX4 because it was cheaper than building out my own machine to do local storage. As far as that goes, it's cute, and seems to work well. All in all, it doesn't look bad from the inside.
And, thank you for having ssh as an option. i'd hate to have to try to root this thing without it.
I think that almost everyone would like to be able to set the maximum size for each share, here are a few examples...
1. Parents want unlimited share size(s), but for each of their kids they wish to limit the share size for each of them so that it doesn't get spammed with stuff that doesn't need to be there. I know a few parents would be very happy if their children's homework etc was stored on the HD rather than just their computer as a back up.
2. Freaks like me will want to set specific share sizes just to allow us to keep things organized and up together.
3. A lot of people have Macs and currently the timemachine will use up the entire drive, it is one heck of a hogger. Since Apple have yet to fix this, and may never do...this may be great for users so they can set a limit on their timemachine share.
I can think of loads of reasons why this would be a great feature, and to be honest it is the only feature (or rather lack of) which is preventing me from buying myself one; though I know a lot of people who already own one or more of these, and therefore I am very interested in at least one for myself.
PS: It may be an idea to also allow some shared "No Limit", thus can use whatever free/usable space is remaining, but those with limits can only use up to the limit(s) set.
PPS: Might also be worth concidering whether or not to have share limits per user as well as per share. This could be a max limit for a user regardless of which shared they are using, or it could be a max limit for them within a specific share.
I think at the end of the day, I could be happy to create a share for each person and set a limit on those shares, leaving mine with 'No Limit'.
Please add a way to restrict the scope of content scanning or/and a switch button in the media settings tab to disable content scanning so that we can get asleep without being disturbed after a terabyte backup, and the drive doesnt catch fire in a hot summer night after we finally manage to sleep
after reading through this forum, it seems as if the Sharespace RAID-5 is really touchy and not very reliable. So I would like you to create a thorough help page on data recovery from crashed RAID-5 array.
I assume there must be a software tool that can be used to recover the data of a crashed sharespace raid-5 array, right?
Many users have access to a "regular" PC and could hook up the 4 drives to it, boot it from a DVD and operate a data recovery tool.
So please provide the software tools (may be the image of a self-bootable DVD with linux and the preconfigured software tool) as well as detailed instructions.
This would enable your users to help themselves so they don't have to contact your support which - in return - would lower your support cost. So providing this software and information would be a win-win.
1. Make the N900 stable and run for more than 2-3 days under light usage / 10 minutes under heavy usage
2. Allow full functionality as stated in website (functionality that last more than #1)
3. Fix the AP mode
4. Fix the firmware so every time when logging into the management console I do not see notices about registering my device, my upload speed being detected, and also the guest wireless being setup after I have clicked ignore for the 1000th time or registered for the 100th time
5. Make the fan actually work to cool the device instead sitting there looking pretty while never spinning. Seeing how heat is an issue and my router loves to be cooled with an external fan, others have proved the same thing. Mental note, heat rises.
6. Fix the USB ports to actually transmit close to a USB 2.0 speed, even though it is blue in color appearing to be a USB 3.0, which it is not. My speeds are not even USB 1.0 fast
7. Fix the CPU section so I can actually upload a file to the EXT USB HDD larger than 1GB without locking up the CPU/chipset/whatever
8. Maybe post a firmware how to guide so the rest of the world could have a chance to actually fix it. Posting the code by itself is pretty good, but without some insight it is probably useless. There are serious nerds out here in the real world that could help, if you let us.
9. Listen to the community. I mean we are the customers after all. Without us, you wouldn't exist nor would your products. I have been so pleased with my N900 that I removed from my system, purchased your competitors product, and vow to fix my useless router that I do not even use by annoying WD to death with these comments, RMA's and trouble tickets as I am still under warranty. WD makes other great products, their routers not so much.
10. Fix the deployment of SMB to be standard, and current. Most people who attempt to use it fail due to WD's deployment of it.
11. Maybe allow the FTP function to exist on the WAN side. With DLNA and SMB, FTP is pretty silly in the LAN. It would be a benefit on the WAN side. I know this doesn't work due to spending 2 days trying to make it work.
If you do not want to pay twonky company for its software update, at least start to develop an internal DLNA solution. There are some existing freeware LGPLed linux distribution in Internet: http://elinux.org/DLNA_Open_Source_Projects I think no one is asking for real time transcoding on the cpu of wd's NAS: we need just a reliable solution that works with all current file containers (mkv, avi, mp4) and possibly with most common DLNA receivers (Xbox, playstation, some new tv set)
We have two NAS devices (4 TB and 8 TB, both Raid 5) for storing data in our installation. Each device is in a separate distant location from the other and in different networks.
The second NAS serves as a backup device for the first one. We have devised a way to automate the backup process but we would be much happier if you could please consider including support for NAS to NAS backup.