Buffalo Forums

This is quite troubling.

I just got an LS210D 4.0TB.  My ancient device starting having fits and, not only is it not supported, the company has been out of business for years.  Needless to say, documentation is truly non-existent, though I do have the original owner's manual, though useless.

So, I copied all of the contents to the LS210D, 200+GB took less than a day.

Windows 10:  I checked the properties of all the directories on the root of the LS210D and summed up their Size and SizeOnDisk: 215GB and 14TB, respectively.

Uh, wait, 14TB is a bit more than 4TB.

The BUFFALO NAS  Navigator2 reports [200.6GB/3709/4GB (5.4%)]  OK, that seems to be cool.

I understand that the size on disk will be more than the size because of sector/cluster not being completely filled.  But if this were the only factor, there would be a bit of an overflow.  (I found an 1TB SD card on Amazon for USD$60.  Yeah, it reported 1TB but the actual size was 64GB.  I got my money back, thank you Amazon.)

I will accept the answer that Microsoft does not play nicely with NAS's, but is there another explanation?

OSD

The linkstation uses a sector size of 128MB, so even a 1kb file will show as 128MB.

It's a bug that Buffalo have never bothered to fix on this model.

@oxygen8 did some research on this a while back which is on the forum .... somewhere

This post seems to have a decent discussion of the top as well:
https://forums.unraid.net/topic/53133-share-in-windows-quotsize-vs-size-on-diskquot-massive-difference-question/

As far as I know this is just a display issue and shouldn't cause much trouble in most scenarios.

Buffalo have never bothered to fix on this model.

Thanks for your comments and confirmation that it's just a display bug.