In that case, I would report the problem to Synology. They have responded in the past with fixes for different drives/firmwares which became really slow/unresponsive when anything other than Explorer (or things that just call Explorer's copy function, like nircmd.exe) are reading/writing data to them, and that's all Opus is doing at the end of the day.
ok, thank you, but the issue is not happening with the explorer's copy fonction , with the shell command as said above, the issue is only happening inside directory opus when using the network share. with the shell command used inside directory opus, no problem.
i hope it's an issue on their side. is there, maybe, for making my life a bit more easier, a shell command for "move" instead of copy, can you tell it to me please ? because i rarely use copy, always move.
thanks !
It's not surprising that the problem doesn't happen with the shell file copy as that's the one thing everyone tests against (if they test at all).
I couldn't see a NirCmd.exe argument to make it move instead of copy, though I'm no expert on that tool and there may be others you could use in its place.
[quote="leo"]It's not surprising that the problem doesn't happen with the shell file copy as that's the one thing everyone tests against (if they test at all).
I couldn't see a NirCmd.exe argument to make it move instead of copy, though I'm no expert on that tool and there may be others you could use in its place.[/quote]
ok, thanks for the info ! do you know any other tool maybe who can do that ? (i'm very new at this). thx.
I'm thinking I have a similar issue going on here. New Windows 8 x64 box, copying file from network I get 1.2-1.5MB/s, Windows Explorer same file copy 80-90Mb/s (so about 9-10MB/s), thats 10x slower.. I've tweaked the buffers and tried everything I can think of.. Copying files is a basic need and 10x slower is beyond acceptable. And switching to Explorer to copy files every time isn't really a choice unless I just stop using DOPUS all together.
Can I simply disable DOPUS's copy dialog and just use the default?
What kind of NAS is it?
Have you checked for firmware updates or reports of similar problems (slow speed when using things other than Explorer)?
Have you checked in case your antivirus or firewall is treating Opus differently?
Which buffer settings did you try changing, and what to?
Have you tried any other programs to see what their speeds are like? (Ones which don't use the shell's file copy code, of course. The DOS Copy command is a quick way to test that, or a tool like TeraCopy.)
You can't disable Opus's copy routines, but you can configure Opus to do something else instead, in most cases. Commands for copying via the shell can be found here and via TeraCopy can be found here.
Exactly the same problem I am having since I start using DOPus few years ago. It happened to earlier QNAP TS-439 Pro and current Synology 3611xs
Now using Win8 x64 Pro. No jumboframe.
Copy 20Gb file to the NAS:
DOPus = 45-55 MB/s
Windows explorer = 100-108 MB/s
Teracopy = 100-108 MB/s
DOS = 100-115 MB/s
Adjusted the copy_buffer_size from default 64kb to 1Mb, DOPus speed improved to 77-84 MB/s. Still far from 100 MB/s.
Tried with 2MB, speed is the same. 4MB, speed dropped to 70-75 MB/s.
with 1MB, copy to NAS speed improved (although not to the max). However 1mb setting has adverse impact on file copy between internal HDD !!
Copy from 2 internal HDD Intel 520 to OWC Extreme pro 6Gb
DOPus = 245-250 MB/s with 64kB, but only 197-210 MB/s with 1MB !
Windows explorer = 450 MB/s for the first 10sec, then down to about 230 MB/s constant.
Teracopy = 230 MB/s constant.
So I believe there is nothing to do with NAS firmware, it is the DOPus file copy setting / mechanism.
Amendment for the internal HDD transfer speed data.
DOPus = 245-250 MB/s with 64kB for first 10sec, then down to about 230 MB/s constant
with 1Mb is constant 197-210 MB/s
Did you try the copy_nonbufferio_threshold setting, setting it to zero in particular (other values may also be worth a try)? (It is separate from the copy_buffer_size setting you mentioned.
When testing, did you time things (reported speed may vary from program to program), and ensure that the files were completely flushed to the network/disk (not just written to a writeback buffer) before stopping the timer?
Tried with antivirus turned off?
And made sure nothing which was being copied was buffered by a previous copy attempt in another program?
Have you checked the NAS firmware is up to date? You may not believe it will make a difference, but it really has made a difference for several people in the past.
At the end of the day, Opus is just calling ReadFile and WriteFile in a loop (and from two separate threads), so there is not a lot, other than the two settings, which should influence what happens unless it is external to Opus.
not with copy_nonbufferio_threshold yet, will do it later when I have access to NAS.
NAS firmware is always up to date. As I mentioned, not only NAS is affected, even internal HDD to HDD is affected. There must be something to do within DOPus setting.
After the post yesterday, I tried other copy_buffer_size and found the optimum (so far) is at 256kb. With this setting, I get about 82-87MB/s to the NAS and 220MB/s between HDD. None of them are at maximum potential, but at least closer for both.
1 strange behavior I noticed was copy_buffer_size at 512kb, the DOPus will "freeze" intermittently. The copy indicator bar is not smooth, it is like stop-move-stop-move. File transfer rate varies significantly from 0.00 (ZERO) MB/s to 117MB/s (NAS). Not sure if this is similar to what reported by martyprod earlier. set it to 256kb or 1mb the problem is gone.
If teracopy is installed, does it replace DOPus file copy mechanism? I ask this because there is an option in teracopy for integration.
Does that completely take over DOPus file copy mechanism including drag-and-drop? If so I might just enable that.
[quote="iieeann"]not with copy_nonbufferio_threshold yet, will do it later when I have access to NAS.
1 strange behavior I noticed was copy_buffer_size at 512kb, the DOPus will "freeze" intermittently. The copy indicator bar is not smooth, it is like stop-move-stop-move. File transfer rate varies significantly from 0.00 (ZERO) MB/s to 117MB/s (NAS). Not sure if this is similar to what reported by martyprod earlier. set it to 256kb or 1mb the problem is gone.
If teracopy is installed, does it replace DOPus file copy mechanism? I ask this because there is an option in teracopy for integration.
Does that completely take over DOPus file copy mechanism including drag-and-drop? If so I might just enable that.
WOOOOOOOOOOw ! i have the exactly same problem ! the freezing happens since so many time that it make me crazy ... wow, damn, it's because i changed the buffer size to 512 ? 
??? thanks i'll change the setting immediatly. i wrote 2 days ago to synology support team, but as someone is reporting the same issue with an another brand of NAS, i don't think it's a synology issue. maybe more a DO or windows issue. about teracopy, i tried it, during a long time now (since someone suggested it here), and the issues are the same and even worst ! so i uninstalled it. i used the trick to have it integrated with the "copy code" in directory opus and ... frezzing or stop copying, continue, stop etc ... the issue is when the the copy "crash", and don't continue anymore, it's a hell pain to kill the process (fortunatly Windows 8 x64 kill process much faster than Windows 7). it's even crashing the network to the Nas and i must wait a bit to access to it again. i installed the 10.5.2.2 beta (x64) from DO some days ago, i did some test, copy or move didn't crashed yet. but i didn't do more test yet.
i spoke too fast. just went back to check the seeing in DO and, buffer size was 500 and 1MB.
but i played with dearopus.net/ during one day (but had no energy to continue for now), so i restaured a backup of the configuration of DO who were around january 2013, maybe that's why no more copy freezing. i'll investigate a bit hardner now. so for now, buffer size is 500 and 1Mb.
Buffer size 500 has problem at my side, why not u try smaller setting?
yes i'll try and report it here
yes i'll try and report it here[/quote]
buffer size at 256kb crash the copy and the whole network
"network not available error 64", just copied a Mp4 of 254Mb, and crashed as soon as the copy started at 9Mb. it's now 3 minutes and the copy dialog does nothing is still "freezed" but the counter is continuing to disply.
(...)
ok the copy dialog just closed, and i'm trying to reach the administrator panel of my nas so i can make a log and send it to synology. the access came back only almost 1 minute after the copy dialog box closed on the DO side 
.
Your case seems complicated.
How about Windows explorer copying to NAS ? or DOS? If that also crash, then your system is having problem, could be PC side or NAS side.
It is easier if you have another PC / laptop to try, then can confirm if the problem is at PC or NAS. I have 4 laptops for testing. For all laptops, using DOPus to copy file to NAS has 50% performance impact.
I'd just like to add my 2c in here. I am also experiencing this issue, but with transfers from another Win7 PC. Explorer copies at ~115MB/sec all day, but the best I can get is ~100MB/sec with Opus and that's only for ~30sec, then it drops back to 60MB/sec or so.
I have tried various cache settings, but this is as good as I can get.
I, like the others, hate the idea of going back to explorer, it represents all that is wrong and distasteful in this world!! 
Surely this is something that can be fixed? If Explorer can do it, Opus can do it better!!
I did a lot of testing of network copy speed in Opus over gigabit ethernet recently, and I could not see any overall speed difference between Opus and Explorer.
There were differences in burst speed (which I think are just differences in how the different buffer sizes affect reported speed of the parts being measured rather than actual speed of the entire chain of operations), and also differences with both programs between how long each test took (some tests were much quicker than others, with the same program, but the high/low/average times were equal for both programs), but overall I could not find a significant difference.
If you set Opus to use a 1MB buffer size, that should give you the same characteristics as the Windows 7 version of Explorer when doing network transfers, although in my testing it made little to no difference. (That may not be the case with all disks, networks, antivirus, etc. of course. Some may treat DOpus.exe differently to Explorer.exe, for example. Some NAS are literally only tested/benchmarked against Explorer and some slight differences in the way Opus and other programs open files may trigger pathological performance issues. It shouldn't matter, though, because both Opus and Explorer are calling very high-level APIs that just take a buffer of data and write it to a file, and the rest is up to the OS and drivers. Assuming default non-buffered I/O settings, newer versions of Opus use separate threads to read and write the data when copying large files from a local drive to a network drive, so almost all of the time Opus spends is in waiting for Windows to read or write the data before it immediately asks Windows to read/write some more data.)
Also remember the factors in this post which can affect copy speed. e.g. Copying lots of small files, Opus will be slower than Explorer by default because Opus copies additional attributes that Explorer doesn't bother with.
And remember it's difficult to measure copy speed due to buffering and differences in how the speed is reported. You need to repeat the tests several times in a row (for each program), with the same files, to account for buffering or interference from other programs that may speed up or slow down each test. I did my tests by looking at the Network tab in Task Manager, and measuring the width of the graph for each file copy. (The high and low points on the graphs varied greatly but the widths of each operation -- i.e. the actual time taken to send the data -- were consistent between both programs.)
Hi,
I have the same problem with a NAS Synology, speed of transfer really really differs (50 mo/s for explorer, 5 mo/s for Dopus) between Explorer and DOPUS (win 10). It concerns both files, big and little. Really strange.
I'm using the latest release. I try some of the things on this post to solve this.
As well as what's in this post, there are a lot of posts on the Synology forum about speed issues (and speed differences with Explorer vs almost literally anything else) with some setups. It seems Synology don't always optimize things for the general case, only for Explorer's unusual way of transferring data, and different device models / firmwares bring back (similar) regressions that had already been fixed in others years ago, for some reason.
Try testing with another Windows machine as the server. If that is the same speed, it points to the NAS not handling some types of file transfer well, which will potentially affect almost everything that reads or writes from the drive that isn't Explorer. If it's also slow with Windows at both ends, it may point to the problem being elsewhere and not the NAS.
(Almost nothing else does the same thing Explorer does, unless they call the basic and fairly limited shell file copy APIs to copy files from A to B. Unfortunately, Microsoft changed the way Explorer works rather than adding similar changes to the general file read/write APIs.)
The buffer size and other settings can help with some devices, though. (Buffer-size performance problems can also be due to network hardware between the PC and NAS, and not always the NAS's fault. Similar with USB devices, where the controllers on some USB devices have pathological performance cases if the buffer sizes aren't what they assume them to be.
(And be careful how speed is measured. The best way is to look at the Network Performance graph in Task Manager and note how long data is being sent for. Don't rely on progress dialogs as, for example, Explorer closes its dialog and claims the data is sent long before it's actually completed. Buffering can also impact results a lot, if the same data is copied multiple times for tests. Virus scanners scanning data as it is read or written can also have a huge impact sometimes, and may treat different programs differently.)