New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
- 2008-2021 © LowEndBox & LowEndTalk. Privacy Policy. Powered by Vanilla.
Back to Top | LowEndTalk | LowEndBox | Dark Theme Config | Advertise
Comments
I've done this on a CPX21 with Plex and it works great, as long as you aren't trying to transcode 4K content.
Thank you very much for the hands on experience sharing. Very encouraging. 1080p high quality is actually good enough for most of the cases, as the majority viewers watch on smart phones. They will never see the difference between 4k and 720p high quality on those tiny screens. They say that this is the fashion to watch netflix 4k movies on phone. Good for neftlix actually. LOL.
Can Hetzner storage box be used for legitimate seed box?
More than likely no.
So KS1 still has room as a seedbox.
I'm not sure how Hetzner deals with those things. They might shut you off or might not do anything. I'm with another German provider for that and so far they haven't said shit.
4k plays with 0 problems on 2vcore cpu, even 1 vcpu, and with 2gb ram... aka cheap vps... if you do no transcode and play direct. To achieve that, best is use native players on mobile or pc, because browsers (edge, chrome etc) usually missing decent amount of codecs, so once its missing, server automatically starts transcoding, aka abusing cpu. 4k playing direct, only uses like 1-2% of cpu.
plex, emby, jellyfin, all has native players, though i think only jellyfin is free.
Can you please tell me the method of installing plex in storage box
You have to install plex on CPX21 and mount storage box for media.
sshfs mount?
Yes, sshfc or nfs.
You can't mount as NFS, it's not supported. I suggest using CIFS. Better performance.
Any tutorial for a noob.?
apt install cifs-utils
mkdir /mnt/bx
mount.cifs -o user=uXXXXXX,pass=XXXXX //uXXXXXX.your-storagebox.de/backup /mnt/bx
cd /mnt/bx
...your files are mounted here
CIFS vs SSHFS which is better?
Over a short distance (Within the same Hetzner region), CIFS usually comes across as more reliable. But SSHFS feels better for long distance usage.
Disclaimer: above is anecdotal based on memories of experience, may not be fully accurate.
SCP is faster than cifs if you want to copy/from their storage boxes.
netcup has storage also?
We have also Storage (FTPS/SMB) including unlimited traffic which has some nice speeds
500GB = 6,90€
1TB = 9,90€
2TB = 17,90€
3TB = 24,90€
5TB = 29,90€
10TB = 49,90€
20TB = 99,90€
Incl. 19 % VAT.
hetzner bx11 1T =2.9€
I didn't say we were cheaper than Hetzner - we don't want to be
very nice
Maybe this is true dedicated resource so it is more expensive than Hetzner's boxes?
If it is dedicated, it is very interesting, because disk io speed is guaranteed.
I have a dedi from the Auction now but I have used a VPS + Storage Box before and it did work just fine. Maybe just a little longer buffering. It's better if you store the media on the Storage Box but use the local disk for the Plex temp files though.
NFS is not supported. I mounted with cifs. sshfs would be too slow.
how can SCP be faster than cifs if it has the encryption overhead etc?
It's not dedicated but you don't have limitations like max. 10 concurrent connections which sucks for plex. I tested both of them and php-friends is way better for this, their storage has indeed nice speeds, for plex it felt even faster than a local WD RED lol
I had several concurrent 4k streams (few with transcoding) and had not a single buffer.
This is very promising. Not sure why Hetzner sets limits for concurrent users for its storage boxes, maybe to reduce IO stress. I like php friends's way better.
Based on my testing I did prior, the concurrent connections actually applies per each incoming IP address rather than for each Storage Box or user/subuser.
e.g. I made 10 connections towards a Storage Box (Over HTTPS with WebDAV) and attempting to make an 11th would hang until the previous 10 have completed. While those 10 connections were ongoing I could open another 10 from a separate machine with a different IP address.
It is not clear if this is intentional or not.
As far as CIFS goes, I do not know whether each file access counts as a separate connection but I sort of doubt it considering some of the I/O I've managed with a Storage Box. I would imagine it is per mount per IP address instead in that case.
This is much better. As you can have a mysql database on the storage box, and have several nginx servers in front of it, each can access the database 10 concurrent connections. If putting varnish or redis upfront to cache the static content to reduce the database access, it may work for a high traffic website.