As the forum is filling with issues for several users, I wanted to add something that you can expect from the WD My Cloud - if you have some luck with your home configuration as I seem to have.
I just recently bought a My Cloud 4TB and did not really measure performance with delivered firmware 3 point sth, I saw some 40 MB/s displayed in Windows 7 when writing to My Cloud, which was better than the 30 MB/s from my previous My Book Live. So I was already happy.
After firmware upgrade to 4.00 I do get around 80 MB/s write performance and around 90 MB/s read performance. Again displayed by Windows, but roughly confirmed by looking at my watch.
I copied 92 files/36,6 GB in about 7 minutes. That is quite good performance in my opinion.
I do use Windows 7 and a AVM Fritz.box as router (German brand)
What disturbs me with this firmware upgrade are two points also mentioned at least similar by many posters here:
-
after firmware upgrade system was quite unresponsive for over an hour, with 1.5 TB on it BUT: for no shares I activated Mediaserving. Still processes like wdmcserver and convert had heavy activity, I can only imagine what happens if mediaserving IS active.
-
there was no sign THAT system was working on something - Twonky displays some progress, btsync does, Logitech Media Server does (programs I use), but nothing visible on My Cloud outside direct SSH connection - this must be improved in the future I think
-
I cannot use btsync anymore, WD raised the level of expertise one has to have before pimping directly on OS level a good bit, but okay, I see that this was always a goodie, and seems still possible. But bad luck for me, as I had a 3 machine setup for syncing with 2 My Book Lives of my family in remote locations, which worked quite well.
Donāt get me wrong, when searching for a solution for btsync I did read that many users cannot use My Cloud at all and there are even severe data losses, but it seems that this little machine has some potential, hopefully WD can get this more stable soon.
1 Like
To be honest, I happened to sign onto these forums a few days after upgrading to FW4, looking for something not problem related. I hadnāt experiened a single hiccup with my upgrade or the performance/stability afterwards. Though, when I looked at the topics listed in here, I about dropped a loaf in my pantsā¦ convinced failure or some other catastrophic performance issue would arise. I was really pretty worried about it after reading all of the horrible stuff that others have experienced.
But somehow, and I donāt know why, but Iām still running with no problem at alll. I wouldnāt have even noticed that I upgraded if I didnāt do it myself.
As far as transfer speeds go, 80MB/s is amazing. I just so happened to catch a glimpse of my speed while transferring some files over and I saw it staying a steady ~30MB/s rangeā¦ which was fine to me, I didnāt seem agonizingly slow. I donāt know what is the expected speed for throughput from my desktop ā router ā NASā¦ all gigabit connections. I donāt feel like doing the math to convert but I was OK with 30MB/s or soā¦ and 80MB/s would be amazing. Iām using Win7 x64.
Incidentally, I redownloaded an old classic program-- TeraCopy. Iāve heard itās worthless on Win8, but I donāt know about Win7. Iām just gonna give it a try and see if it has any impact on copy speed. If not, Iāll just uninstall it; couldnāt hurt to try.
But I feel for all you that are experiencing all these problems, that **bleep** so bad. Iām thankful mine has survived by a miracle or something. Letās hope it stays that way! But itās been running that FW for like a week or so at least? I havenāt seen any abnormal behavior yet. So despite what it seems glancing at this forum pageā¦ not EVERYONE has suffered calamity and destruction at the hands of FW4. Then again, I donāt screw around with any of the files on there that arenāt mineā¦ and I definitely am too apprehensive to install any service/software on it. I donāt want to tempt fate. Though I logged in via SSL just to see what the structure and contents of the drive actually held. Yehā¦ a standard *nix flavor, as expected. Then I just typed "rm -rf /"and now my firmware is acting strange. JK. Iāve always wanted to use that command, though. Just not on any of my stuff. 
I would somewhat agree with the v4 I/O performance especially the reading. In v3 I got average 70MB/s writes and 80MB/s reads, but in v4 80MB/s writes and 100MB/s reads (peak 108MB/s).
Think most of the issues others are having with v4 (especially those with huge amount of medias) is on with the WD indexing feature (scanning and thumbnail extraction). I too experience it at times which makes all other I/Os lag (e.g. ssh, Dashboard). But when the indexing completes, this drive flies!
Another is the 64K pagesize (-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64) which makes simple utilities installation a nightmare. So far I only managed to produce 64K *.debs below, the rest failed with internal compiler issues.
build/root/iperf_2.0.5-3_armhf.deb
build/root/telnetd_0.17-36_armhf.deb
build/root/telnet_0.17-36_armhf.deb
build/root/build-essential_11.5_armhf.deb
Nazar78 wrote:
I would somewhat agree with the v4 I/O performance especially the reading. In v3 I got average 70MB/s writes and 80MB/s reads, but in v4 80MB/s writes and 100MB/s reads (peak 108MB/s).
Think most of the issues others are having with v4 (especially those with huge amount of medias) is on with the WD indexing feature (scanning and thumbnail extraction). I too experience it at times which makes all other I/Os lag (e.g. ssh, Dashboard). But when the indexing completes, this drive flies!
Another is the 64K pagesize (-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64) which makes simple utilities installation a nightmare. So far I only managed to produce 64K *.debs below, the rest failed with internal compiler issues.
build/root/iperf_2.0.5-3_armhf.deb
build/root/telnetd_0.17-36_armhf.deb
build/root/telnet_0.17-36_armhf.deb
build/root/build-essential_11.5_armhf.deb
You must be one of the few privileged guys who already had excellent transfer rates with small page size.
Myself never got more that about 20MB/s for big files over GHz wired LAN.
I wonder why the **bleep** WD chose to to replace one evil with another by going the 64K route???
I would prefer to find out why my version 3 never ever reached acceptable speeds. It can not be the broken media scanning/indexing because I had shut it off.
Please inform us when you have found out to build āordinaryā packages like htop, gdisk and mc.
These would help analyzing the situation.
I tested it with v 4 FW and found it is behaving strange: depending on the folder and time, I get 80 MB (dropping to 50-65) write rate for smaller files (mp3) and some 70, soon dropping to 30-40 MB for larger files. Or quite opposite, at times. Go figure. Win 7/64, GB router/AP (TPLink 3600).
It seems faster AND slower than the previous FW, depending on files and time of the day.
LinAdmin
Please note my āfantasticā values are (in fact, over a longer period) around 50/30MB but yes, at times, more than that. Some people connect it directly to the PC and get very good values, too. I do it via a router and although it is a GB one, it might be not the best of the best.
I take it you checked the network infrastructure at your place for simple failures/deficiencies (cabling/HW)ā¦
I have never had any problem with this one either. Been using since early days. Always auto update. May be i dont use it much but i have around 5 or 6 devices connected to it (TV, 2 Laptops, Pi, Android Box, Mobiles etc) and it has performed extremely well. Only downside is that it does not have a native torrent client.
