Recent posts

#21

Storage / Re: slow copying to TS5810/580...

Last post by Kane88 - March 21, 2026, 02:00:26 AM

So I got a response from Buffalo tech support, and they said to contact Microsoft.  I guess I would expect that somewhat, with an out of warranty unit.

However, since the PCs with RAID 0 arrays in them copy to each other just fine at the right speed:
I don't see Microsoft doing anything about it.  Nor can I afford to pay for a tech support case with them.

So far only my 600 G9 (and I think an HP 6300 maybe?) can copy ok to the TS5810 at the right speed.  And this pc does NOT have an Intel RAID chipset in it.

It is interesting to note that the PCs that have the Intel RAID chipsets in them, are the ones that face this problem.  Even in AHCI single drive mode on the Intel RAID chipsets, the problem still happens on those machines.

I'm thinking about installing the latest RST Rapid Storage drivers but I have not, thinking they may conflict with the Windows OS itself, and in some cases the RST drivers will be much older than what MS is using as a default these days.

I also got a couple of Intel I226-V cards that are 2.5gb, and same thing happened with them.  So I don't think it is so much in the networking hardware.

I am wondering if any of you can duplicate this problem, even with a 5000 series or 3000 series unit, as the 5800 was only copying from or to it at about 30MB/sec.  And I was using various ISOs like Win 11 ISO, or DVD ISOs I made of my movies.  Same data sets copied just fine at the right speed between PCs.

I don't have a Linux PC, but I am wondering if this is an issue copying from NTFS to EXT4 or something else.

I don't know what else to rule out.


It's a real head scratcher.  And hard to believe that the TS5810 10gbe port is reduced to copying at a mere 50 megabytes per second to it, for most of my computers.

#22

Storage / slow copying to TS5810/5800 fr...

Last post by Kane88 - March 15, 2026, 12:24:04 PM

Have any of you seen this before?  I seem to have found a bug in the Firmware for the Terastation 5810/5000 units.  I've sent in a support request to buffalo tech support.  I hope they will be able to come up with a fix for this.

When I copy files to my Tersatations from a Windows 11 25H2 Intel Desktop PC with a RAID 0 array, the copy goes VERY slow.

With the 5810 it only copies at 45-50MB/sec and with the 5800 only 25-30MB/sec

Current firmware is on both units:  6.08 for the 5810, and 4.20 for the 5800

The TS 5810 has 4 separate RAID0 arrays and are completely blank for testing.

Only one machine has access to the Terastation at a time, it is not an issue of network congestion.

With the 5810 I am using a 2.5gbe switch and the TS 10gbe port
With the 5800 I am using a 1gbe switch and the TS 1gbe port

To rule out other problems out I tried
-copying between two machines that both have RAID 0, and both can copy to each other at 200-250MB/sec no problem.
-and copying to the TS5810 from a PC with a single SATA HDD.  It copies at about 180-200MB/sec or so to the TS 5810, no problem.
-iperf3 tests show everything is happy at about 2.2-2.3gb per second

It is these Intel RAID 0 desktop PCs that the Terastation does not like.  Why do these arrays copy so slow to the Terastation?  It doesn't make sense.  I have recently upgraded to 2.5gb ethernet.  And I can copy at nearly 200-250MB/sec to basically any other device on my 2.5gb network, except for my Terastations.

The PCs I tried are on the same switch as the 5810, and I have tried three different cables (2 cat 5e and 1 cat 6)and three different ports on the switch.  (And FYI cat 5e CAN supposedly handle at least 5gbps and up to 10gbps, and my tests proved it out to work at at least 2.5gbe anyway)

It's not the switch.  It's not the cables.  It's not the PCs.  It's something to do with the Tersastation itself.

The two desktop PCs go through a pair of 2.5gbe switches to each other from two different rooms and are a good 60 ft apart.  They copy to each other just fine at the right speed.  Yet when I go from one of them that is in the same room with the TS 5810 and connected to the SAME switch with 10ft cat 6 cables, I can only get 50MB/sec to the Terastation?  It makes no sense.


Hardware I am using
Two HP Elitedesk 8300 with Realtek 8125 2.5gbe cards + WD 24tb RAID 0 arrays, with the on board network card disabled
One HP Elitedesk 800 G3 with Realtek 8125 2.5gbe card + WD 28tb RAID 0 array, with the on board network card disabled

An HP ProDesk 600 G9 with Realtek 8125 2.5gbe card + Seagate 4tb SATA HDD, with the on board network card disabled

All are Windows 11 Pro 25H2

Separately, I also used the on board intel 1gb ethernet on these machines with the TS 5800, without any 2.5gbe card installed.  And a similar problem.  RAID 0 desktop PCs just don't play nice with these terastations.  If I copy direct from a single hdd of course it will max out at 100MB/sec no problem.


I'm really disappointed that my Terastations are this slow with PCs that use RAID 0 arrays.  The whole point to upgrading to 2.5gbe for me was to get the 10gbe port going with my TS5810 to my PCs that have RAID 0 arrays in them, and put that extra speed to use.



I have a pair of Intel i225 2.5gbe cards on the way to rule out the realtek cards.  Though I do not think the network cards are the problem, because the copy speeds are just fine to each other.

And interestingly- the 800 G3 today even from USB 3.0 is still only copying to the TS5810 at about 50MB/sec

I just do not understand why I need to have a 13th generation i5 PC to write at 2.5gbe speeds to a NAS that is well over 10 years old.  It doesn't make sense.

#23

Storage / Re: SSD and NAS – Revolutionar...

Last post by Kane88 - March 15, 2026, 12:16:24 PM

Also, we are seeing MFRs selling some 5gbe ALL NVME SSD NAS such as this one.
https://www.amazon.com/TERRAMASTER-F4-SSD-Storage-High-Performance/dp/B0F8BD112M?th=1

Is Buffalo planning to do something similar?  I'm just curious.  I think if anything, an all NVMe NAS could be a good thing, but only in terms of portability.  Kind of a niche market but A&E people that are on the move might benefit having such a thing for quick media editing.


And QNAP has been at this for some time already.  As much as I like my Terastations, I would like to see a future generation have an HDMI port and maybe support for adding apps and such like QNAP and Synology do.  I use my Terastations for media, and products like this, might be what I look at in the future.  Note the HDMI port, 10gbe and 2.5gb ports on this guy.  I'd love to see something like this for 3.5 SATA drives on a future Terastation.  I realize media is a niche product for NAS, but there are people out there like myself, who use their terastations for media archives to where the HDMI port truly, would be useful. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMz90BBWSts

#24

Storage / Re: SSD and NAS – Revolutionar...

Last post by Kane88 - March 15, 2026, 12:14:12 PM

I don't think the power savings is enough to justify data reliability at all.


Until SSD Manufacturers truly explain to us how the TBW (Terabyte Written or Workload) works, I do not feel safe using SSDs for storage, especially in raid configurations.

My understanding is that the P/E program/erase cycle of an SSD also affects the life of the SSD.  And why that has to be done at all is beyond me.  When you delete a file on a hard drive, the data is still there.  But I guess that process is completely different with SSDs.

I wish they would explain how TBW really is affected with a TLC Triple Layer Cell SSD for example.  Writing data to only one of the three cells, generally counts as writing to all three cells of a TLC cell.  Because the entire three cells have to be written at one time.

So if your file saves and copies and such are only rewriting one cell of each TLC cell, it is wasting the other two blocks.  And so your 1200TBW drive in effect is only a 400TBW.

#25

Storage / Re: Can't Access ls210DA0C

Last post by Kane88 - March 15, 2026, 01:01:37 AM

Also, this sounds like a Linkstation 210 you have?  You may need to enable SMB 2.x on the admin console so that you can view it.  SMB 1.x was knocked out of windows some time ago.  It can be added back in at your own risk, and I don't recommend doing so.  But I share this for the knowledge that it CAN be added back in to Win 10 or Win 11, in case of an emergency or something like that.

https://winsides.com/enable-smb-1-0-cifs-file-sharing-support-windows-11/

#26

Storage / Re: Can't Access ls210DA0C

Last post by Kane88 - March 15, 2026, 12:57:50 AM

Try control panel > network and sharing center > change advanced sharing settings
takes you to the settings panel for this (I couldn't find it directly from the settings panel)

set your network as public or private, I use private
network discover + file and printer sharing I believe need to be ON if these are OFF windows will not be able to browse the network and/or share files between PCs too.
I have this ON for private networks and OFF for public ones.

Windows updates may have disabled these settings or turned them off as a default.  Make a note of what your settings are and save a screenshot.

Hope this helps.

#27

Storage / Re: LS-WXL fails to reboot aft...

Last post by Kane88 - March 15, 2026, 12:44:27 AM

Not sure how you are trying to do the update, with TFTP or what exactly.  But from my notes here, the problem you seem to have is that the WXL needs the TFTP boot blocks again.

-----

My old TFTP notes, these should help if you have the TFTP files for your unit.

PC 1 - main workstation pc
PC 2 - second pc - media center, laptop, test box, whatever

disable windows firewall on both PCs during the update process

All PCs and NAS - on local network/switch

PC 2 - 192.168.11.1 / 255.255.255.0 - firewall disabled, run tftp app - as admin
PC 1 - DHCP, local network
NAS - powered off, plugged into switch on the same network

Verify all items are connected to LAN, nothing should be directly connected to the NAS

tftp app running on PC2
turn on NAS, red error lights blink - hold reset for 30 secs, it will boot
verify 2 sets of blocks are sent from tftp on PC2
unit grabs a dhcp address after it boots

after a few mins, use nasnavi on PC1, find nas
run firmware update, right click, check all boxes on right side
start update

then, older models have problems rebooting nas during update
it freaks out, needing the tftp blocks again...

shut the nas unit off.
close out tftp on PC2, reopen it.
keep PC2 on the 192.168.11.1 address
turn unit back on, hold the reset for 30 secs again...
verify 2 sets of blocks are sent from PC2 again...

unit should start flashing orange, 2 long - 5 short - indicating firmware is updated.
it loses connection to the update app for whatever reason.  you can close and reopen it.

#28

Storage / Re: Direct Connect TS1200 Nas...

Last post by Kane88 - March 14, 2026, 06:32:39 PM

Did you use this router before with your TS?  If so the settings should be the same.

You can use the router without a wan connection, and should still be able to access your files.  You just have to get the pc and the TS to talk to each other, you'll do that by using nas navigator or checking connected devices in the routers admin console,  from there you'll drive map according to ip information.

You can plug the terastation directly into your pc, but you need to know what the Terastations IP address is in order to use it.  That's the issue.  The 1000 series does not have a display, so you can't see it.  You'd have to read the manual and see if it defaults to a certain IP range, I don't know.

If it was me, I would set up the router and connect everything to it, and use dhcp.

#29

Storage / Re: LS220 transfer speeds

Last post by Kane88 - March 14, 2026, 05:57:35 PM

I have just bought an ls210 and searching for info on it I came across a comment saying the same thing that it struggles with smb2. I think there is even a message in the settings that it will be slower if you select smb2.

I always wondered why manufacturers stuck to smb1 for so long after it was superceeded but I suppose it allowed them to use cheaper and slower hardware.

Microsoft have removed smb1 from Win10 though because of its secruity problems so I don't know how your pc would be sometimes using it unless you have added it back manually.

This is the issue.  SMB2.  You can use SMB1 and it will go up to about 45MB/sec

The slow speed is why I eventually moved off of Linkstations and over to Terastations.   Linkstations are great starter devices, but to really move data, they are no faster than a USB 2.0 hard drive at best.


As for SMB 1.x it CAN be added back to Windows 10 or 11.  But you do so at your own risk.  Leaving SMB 1.x turned on does make your pc vulnerable to attacks. 
https://winsides.com/enable-smb-1-0-cifs-file-sharing-support-windows-11/


IF you MUST use it, use it sparingly, or try these suggestions.

You don't want to use SMB 1.x on a PC that has critical stuff on it you don't want compromised.  My suggestion would be to use an older PC to map your linkstation to.  Then use that share from the older PC to your daily driver PC.  You could also do the same with Oracle VirtualBox which is free, and create a VM that you don't care about so much, if it were to get compromised. 

That's the only way you're going to get any decent speed out of your linkstation.  Now READS of course are going to be faster- probably 60-70MB/sec which is not bad for that little toaster box NAS.

My advice is to do that or find a Terastation 3200 or 3400 as a starting point, and sell off your Linkstation to a friend or family as a starter NAS device.  The TS 3400 can be had for under 100 bucks on ebay and will give you more drive bays and double the speed at least.  The 5200 or 5400 also can be had for about that but they are a harder find.

Even the TS 3400 is a big improvement over the LS220s. 

hope this helps.

#30

Storage / Re: Buffalo NAS LS2208 Series ...

Last post by Kane88 - March 14, 2026, 05:49:08 PM

Using Win 11 and file explorer to access my mapped Terastation shares, I see this at times also.  If you use file explorer and just let the error window stay there, you will file explorer window refresh behind that error msg box, with the 0 byte files- right there.  I just let it overwrite the files.  They are 0 size like you say. 

Something gets ahead of itself is why it happens, this we know.  Windows issue or buggy buffalo firmware, that's all I can think of.