Cannot scan a network drive

Get answers about using MediaMonkey 4 for Windows.

Moderator: Gurus

turls
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 3:25 am

Still issues

Post by turls »

I have an Infrant ReadyNAS--I'm still having issues. Debug logs don't help because they don't show enough detail even with the debug version. (I've been working with Russell but he told me he was kind of busy with the new release version and hasn't worked with me much yet).

A similar/same issue is also covered in this thread. Is anybody else noting this type of behavior? ("doesn't always stop same place", "have to kill the process manually")

I'm hoping others with the same issue with a SMB device will respond here or contact support--I think this is going to be a hard one to track down. It is very intermittent for me, but I can't narrow it down to consistent behavior for any certain file/track.

I think we can get Infrant to help as they have worked with software developers before.
turls
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 3:25 am

Possible workaround

Post by turls »

Looks like MediaMonkey support is going to try to figure out the deal with Samba shares in the future, in the meantime, if this issue affects you (I have it with a Infrant ReadyNAS), try

http://ccollomb.free.fr/unlocker/

To unlock the folder when it gets hung. This should allow MediaMonkey to get past the file locking issue and complete the scan.
Kos
Posts: 288
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 5:05 am
Location: Denmark

Just for your information

Post by Kos »

My 12000+ songs stored on a Maxtor Shared Storage Plus were detected quickly by MediaMonkey. To make the MediaMonkey package complete all we need now is a MediaMonkey media server!

Kos
Setup: Sonos, Twonky, Qnap, MediaMonkey Lifetime
turls
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 3:25 am

Post by turls »

Unfortuantely, on the Infrant front, MediaMonkey support has passed the issue back to them and they haven't given me a hint of any solution in weeks. I hope this isn't a trend as they (infrant) were always responsive in the past. They've got too much competition to go downhill on support.
rusty
Posts: 8844
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2003 3:39 am
Location: Montreal, Canada

Solution to NAS scanning problems

Post by rusty »

Received word of the following from turls. Hopefully it'll help others out there:

I've turned off Jumbo Frames, set MTU to 1492, and everything with scanning and MediaMonkey seems much faster. Files that hung it up before now complete scanning just fine.

-Rusty
Lowlander
Posts: 58512
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 5:53 pm

Post by Lowlander »

@Developers
Are you planning to solve possible this issue with jumbo frames?
jiri
Posts: 5427
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Post by jiri »

To clarify: As far as we know (and we are pretty sure about it), it isn't a problem of MM, it's a problem of the device that's just sometimes triggered by MM scanning tracks.

Jiri
turls
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 3:25 am

Post by turls »

Watch out there is a glitch in current software on ReadyNAS, don't mess with the speed (leave it on auto-negotiate)--just change MTU to 1492 and turn off Jumbo Frames. You may want to just try turning off Jumbo Frames first.

I had to get beta firmware to correct my mistake of switching to 100mb instead of auto-negotiate.

Also, I'm wondering if anybody has a NAS with jumbo frame support that they haven't had this issue on.

I've got too many devices that aren't jumbo-frame compatible to be messing with that anyway, good time to turn it off.
Hexland
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 2:02 pm

Post by Hexland »

This might be the answer to my thread too

http://www.mediamonkey.com/forum/viewto ... highlight=
turls
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 3:25 am

Post by turls »

I still would like to see MM incorporate some kind of a timeout so situations like this don't just hang/crash MM, as I was fine on every other app for months even with the jumbo frame issue (if that is for sure what the issue was). That's why I'm interested to see what other NAS with jumbo frames do, because I don't see why their implementation would be that different from other vendors using Linux/Samba.
Post Reply