Thread: Catalina ends support for NAS...anybody going to miss it?

Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23
  1. #11  
    Senior Member Blair S. Paulsen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    5,171
    I really hope this is a short term issue as Apple updates it's networking protocols, particularly for Catalina.
    In 2020, assuming you aren't an edge case, I fully agree that simply connecting to a NAS should be trivial.

    Cheers - #19
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL.
    Posts
    78
    Michael write -
    I have two QNAP systems both connected to my 10G network. My iMacPro connects to both no problem. My MacBook Pro will connect to whichever I attempt to connect to first (A or B), but will not connect to the other (B or A). This behavior is the same whether I try to connect to smb://IP.V4.ADDRESS/ or use the Network browser and connect to what it sees courtesy of Bonjour. From the QNAP side, both NAS units are reporting successful authentication attempts. I.e., if I'm starting out fresh (no recent servers, no NAS units mounted, fresh relaunch of Finder) and I attempt to connect to the B unit, it succeeds (and the B unit logs a successful attempt to authenticate and access that device). If I then try to connect to A in essentially the same way, the operation fails (silently if I go via Command-K and use the IP address and SMD protocol), or "The Operation Failed" if I try to go via the Finder's network browser. In both cases, the A unit reports that a successful authentication was received. Ditto if I start with A and then try to add B.

    What kind of nonsense is this. Michael - you know who I am. You have my email address. You see me on all these forums. Why did you not contact me. I install shared storage systems every damn day - everything from QNAP to Synology, to everything else on the market. There is NO PROBLEM with macOS 10.15 (even 10.15.3). All of this works perfectly if your system is setup correctly.
    For someone who knows infinitely more than I will ever know (yes, you Michael) - I am amazed by your post. This is how you setup your system. It's the way that "everyone" does it -
    you get a 10G switch. You plug in QNAP # 1 10G port to the 10G switch. You plug in QNAP # 2 to the 10G switch. You plug in your computers 10G ports to the 10G switch.
    You manually assign STATIC IP addresses to everything. The following IP addresses are just an example - you can use whatever you want -
    your switch becomes 192.168.2.10
    QNAP # 1 10G port becomes 192.168.2.3
    QNAP # 2 10G port becomes 192.168.2.4
    Your first computer becomes 192.68.2.11
    your second computer becomes 192.168.2.12
    you keep all your internet traffic off the 10G network.
    You simply click on GO> Connect To Server> smb://192.168.2.3 and everything connects to the first QNAP
    you simply click on GO> Connect To Server> smb://192.168.2.4 and everything connects to the second QNAP.
    this is not brain surgery - this is simple networking, and it works perfectly.
    And it works perfectly with macOS 10.15.3 Catalina.

    You people are making these crazy assumptions, and relying on the morons on an Apple "genius" support site to help you - WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU !
    As for macOS Server - Apple decided to degrade macOS Server starting with macOS 10.13. I know, because I did nothing but build Mac servers for video shared storage
    up until 10.12.6. Then when macOS 10.13 came out, Apple degraded the server product, and screwed up file sharing.
    Well GUESS WHAT - this is now FIXED in macOS 10.15, and File Sharing will work if you want to use a new 2019 Mac Pro as a file server with a 10G or 40G card in one of the PCI slots.
    But it did NOT work in macOS 10.13 or macOS 10.14 without all kinds of bizarre permissions issues, and operational issues.
    You no longer need the "server" software - you can just use simple file sharing.
    How do I know this - because since 2009, I was building macOS server systems, and when 10.13 came out, I could no longer upgrade any systems and have them remain functional
    that is when I became heavily involved with QNAP and Synology.

    To repeat (and I will re read all the comments in this thread to add info) - there is NOTHING wrong with macOS 10.15 and network attached storage systems. Any thing that people are reporting
    are probably user error. My clients have NO ISSUES with any of this stuff.

    Bob Zelin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    433
    For a datapoint, I am having no issues with Both 10.14 (iMac Pros and Mac MiniS) and 10.15 (Mac Pro) with a FreeNas System that is Serving AFP, SMB, and NFS shares on a 10G network. And no, I am not serving the same share with different protocols. AFP for main editorial share, NFS for FCPx libraries and SMB for archival shares.

    The only thing I ran into is that you can used tagged VLAN’s on the new Mac Pro and reach wire speed. It maxes out at a out 480MB/s. As soon as I let my switch tag the frames, speeds when back up to almost 1GB/s.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL.
    Posts
    78
    Hi Matthew -
    running a 45Drives system ?
    Bob Zelin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    433
    Hey Bob

    No I did something you would yell at me for, bought a decommissioned Westmere era server and rolled my own. Not for everyone, but saved me some major bucks. My company had so many 8-drive raids that were shelved as archival it just made sense. Moved those to LTO and used the drives to populate the server.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL.
    Posts
    78
    I just saw on fcp.co, that LumaForge and Studio Network Solutions are reporting disconnects with SMB to their systems when using Catalina. I have been seeing random "disconnects" to QNAP systems since 10.13.
    Some people see it, some people don't. If you look at Ronny Courtens entire post on this - he starts the thread stating that they have not seen this, even with large clients in Norway, and then he says that they have just started to
    see random disconnects, and have reported this to Apple. Like I said - I have been seeing random disconnects from Apple products with SMB since macOS 10.13. In the REAL world, people continue to use this every day.
    They reconnect. They initially blame the QNAP, I tell them "you can change to AFP" - but they just plow along. In every 2019 Mac Pro with 10.15 that I have installed so far (about 5 of them) - not one client has called me to
    complain.
    I can sit here and rant about Apple all day long (and I don't like what they are doing with their "security practices" in 10.15) - but let's face it - if you have been using Adobe Premiere, FCP X, Davinci Resolve or AVID Media - guess what -
    BUGS EXIST. If they did not exist, then there would never be updates - there would never be a need for them. Things are always broken. No one knows this more than Michael Tiemann. I don't care if it's Pro Tools - this is the way
    it's always been. New software and firmware releases have always been more about fixing problems, than "new features" - even though everyone likes to say that. Please don't feel like I am trying to defend QNAP here.
    QNAP writes BAD FIRMWARE ALL THE TIME !!!!! I always joke when people ask me "what happens when the QNAP dies" - I always say that they NEVER die - but they ALWAYS write bad firmware. The only stable version of
    QTS 4.3.6 was QTS 4.3.6.1070, and the only stable version of QTS 4.4.1 was QTS 4.4.1.1146. Are we all going to stop using Adobe products, because the Mercury Transmit feature doesn't work anymore, and the Media Cache
    is a complete nightmare, and has been a nightmare for years now ? We DEAL WITH IT. Just like disconnects from 10.15 Catalina systems.

    Put on your Big Boy Pants. Code writers screw up, just like we do.

    Bob Zelin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Kilgroe View Post
    OSX Catalina has direct support for 25G, 40G, 100G (and now it seems 400G too) network adapters from Intel, Mellanox and a couple others. Which are all new additions now that the new Mac Pro has PCIe slots again.
    Jeff, does Catalina really have driver support for Mellanox etc? That's cool if so, I haven't been able to find more info on it though.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by Roy Pearson View Post
    Jeff, does Catalina really have driver support for Mellanox etc? That's cool if so, I haven't been able to find more info on it though.
    I’m going to go out on a limb and say yes, as there are models listed if you dig in the OS. I don’t have a Mac Pro here or available and no TB3 PCIe expanders that would work to test so can’t try it myself. I’m itching to do so. The only reason I’m not saying it’s a 100% guarantee that the drivers are there is Apple has done this before where they have hardware or chipsets listed in various plists and no actual driver to back it.

    The Mellanox PCIe v2 dual 10G SFP card is supported, which is the model previous to the current one as I had that running in a sonnet TB2 PCIe expander on a trashcan mac. The Sonnet and QNAP 10GE to TB3 adapters both use Mellanox chipsets and work great. Just plug them in and go. So I’m really just unsure about the 25G and up adapters, even though specific cards are indeed referenced in Catalina.
    - Jeff Kilgroe
    - Applied Visual Technologies, LLC | RojoMojo
    - Just me and my 8K Monstro VV kicking ass.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #19  
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL.
    Posts
    78
    I continue to install new QNAP systems every day - and most people, without asking me, are using macOS 10.15.x, and most of those are macOS 10.15.3. All the new 2019 Mac Pro's I have installed are running macOS 10.15.3.
    Are there OCCATIONAL disconnects - yes, but I always see OCCATIONAL disconnects. It does not disconnect every 10 minutes, or every hour, or even every 6 hours ! Just once in a while. This does not represent a "non functioning
    system".
    ATTO has 40G drivers RIGHT NOW for all this stuff - and YES, for Macintosh.
    https://www.atto.com/downloads/188/

    For your reference, Sonnet Thunderbolt 3 to 10G adaptors use Aquantia AQC-107 chipsets, not Mellanox. Same as Apple, same as ASUS, same as QNAP (same as OWC which is the Sonnet).
    Bob Zelin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #20  
    So Bob helped me sort out whatever it was that made my one computer unable to access my QNAP NAS units that my other computer could easily access. There's still a mystery to solve regarding the QFinder Pro app, but it no longer directly implicates SMB. There are still gaps between what various documents say and how systems work, and it is not very helpful that when reps for Apple do speak, they say things like "we don't support 3rd-party systems" rather than "it should just work". One could say "it's just Apple being Apple", but it's not a very "pro" way to behave. Interoperability is a key attribute in the pro world.
    Michael Tiemann, Chapel Hill NC

    "Dream so big you can share!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

Tags for this Thread

View Tag Cloud

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts