Performance after update to Maverick a total disaster.

Appears to be justified in that article. You edited the content. It says

"The latest version of Samba is offered only with General Public License Version 3 (GPLv3) licensing, which includes restrictions that essentially prevent Apple from incorporating it into commercially packaged software like Mac OS X."

Nothing about Apple finding it unpalatable. It may be best to start a new post as this is starting to get off-topic.

Cheers

Pete

I thought the probem was that Apple dropped AFP in favor of SMB2:

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/06/11/apple-shifts-from-afp-file-sharing-to- smb2-in-os-x-109-mavericks

Regardless of what library they're using, whether from Samba or internally developed, they need to fix the NAS performance problem, as it was clearly introduced by Apple with the release of Mavericks.

I appreciate the ongoing feedback - I'm holding off on the Mavericks update until someone here confirms that the performance problem is fixed.

Thanks everyone.

I don't think this will ever get solved. There simply aren't enough people either affected or posting on here about it.

It would need an avalanche of posts, getting picked up by various blogs etc before anything was done.

I mailed Apple about it but I'm just one person.

Regards

I too have mailed and got no response. There must be more then just us on here complaining surely?

Anybody found any work arounds as tried using smb but it just wont connect to my NAS despite trying multiple synatx's

Yes, I am holding upgrading too, but apparently most people are happy with their results.

Actually these guys are happier now, getting FASTER performance after upgrading to Mavericks and SAMBA2.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2353959

Samba 2 must be the key here.

I tried the CIFS thing. Made no difference at all. Finder still hangs when copying.

I recently had our storage experts at work checking out my configuration. I am not that good at this. (I had to bribe them with food to come over. But they are good. They all have big beards and bellies so I trust them)

We even tried with three different OSX versions at home. We even tried a Hackintosh with the NAS. ALL worked fine, except the Mavericks one.

I saw that Synology claims better performance in DSM 5.x on 10.9 but this version is still in beta. Has anyone tried that one?

I didn't edit anything...I provided the link and didn't quote from the article. Apple's can make a decision to use GPLv3 if they want but they never will because it would mean open sourcing the entire OS, thus it is unpalatable to Apple.

I was replying to the comments asking why Apple needed to change anything at all about file sharing support. My original comment was to use FTP to the NAS as a workaround for the time being, even though it is old and antiquated, it works a lot better than SMB under Mavericks to my Synology NAS right now. As far as I'm aware Apple doesn't have any fixes to SMB performance to the NAS (DSM 4) in the pipeline.

A friend suggested to me to try out Pathfinder. I didn't think it would be any different for the file copying woes but it seems to be working better than the Finder does right now in my casual testing.

I'll need to do more testing but Pathfinder has a free trial so it won't hurt to see if this can be an effecive work around for copying files to a NAS.

http://cocoatech.com/pathfinder/

If this is 'only' a finder issue, I guess we can bring back the FTFF mantra.

I would be VERY surprised if file copy performance improves with Pathfinder or any other tool.

But CIFS could be SAMBA 1, right? Again, the key is to enable SAMBA 2 (you can do it at the Synology side easily) and force somehow OS X to use SAMBA 2 instead of AFP or Samba 1 when connecting to the NAS.

I don't know if there is an easy way to test this.

But again, these guys are getting north of 100 MB/s with it. There should be an outrage here and everywhere, in my humble opinion, if things were so ugly for everybody who invested heavily on a Synology box.

What DSM 5.0 promises is better performance with AFP (apparently AFP is really screwed up with Synology+Mavericks), but I don't dare to test the beta either... My Synology is mission critical (it means: supports all the kids movies!).

Any ideas?

I am trying DSM 5 at the moment so will see how it goes with Mavericks. Hopefully it will play nicely and I can start using my NAS as a NAS again!

I've read all the posts in this thread but no one mentions how they are getting their speed data. What are you using to measure the transfer speeds?

You can use the resource monitor in DSM to see the transfer speeds (on each interface), or you can use Activity Monitor in your Utilities folder on your Mac to look at the network transfer rate as well. Both are rough estimates since there could be other activity on the network connection that will show up in addition to the file transfer, but this is close enough since we're looking for stalls dropouts and slow transfers.

It could be that Pathfinder uses terminal commands to copy files or some other method (API) than the Finder uses, but I am seeing "OK" performance with Pathfinder instead of miserable performance in the Finder... 20-40MB/sec vs stalling after a few hundred megs are moved.