Your brilliant answer is very comprehensive. It only has small minor errors.
I have written here several times that the Roon installation directory is on an SSD, including the database, the log file, etc.
This brilliant suggestion has already come from others, but first from the Roon team themselves, who suggest exactly this for an installation. And I stuck to that strictly
Will the Roon team read along here and have a good laugh. The error will be known, but you don’t have to do anything, a NAS installation has no support. And the developer of the NAS app, Mr. Rieke, also refers to this forum. He doesn’t want to answer, even when there are error messages about php in his current version of the app, which he should actually be grateful for.
Hello, I have the same requirements (the same NAS with 2x HD but 4TB in Raid 1 and an SSD for the data) and the same error with the hard drive accesses every 4-5 seconds.
My database is on an SSD and when I turn off Roonserver there is silence and the NAS can go to sleep. I don’t think this is an advantage for the lifespan of the hard drives.
I came to Roon in the first phase because my old NAS is now 10 years old. At the moment I am convinced of the operation but not of the implementation on the NAS, which should last a few years again.
´Accessing´ means one ´click´ of the drive like the head repositioning for read/write?
Then I can report the same behavior. I just do not notice it.
I turn off Roonserver there is silence and the NAS can go to sleep. I don’t think this is an advantage for the lifespan of the hard drives.
Not familiar with Asustor´s OS but I run roon on a Qnap and that one is sending HDDs to deep-sleep regardless of roon still clicking around.
If you use NAS grade drives (which is recommended for RAID1 anyways), surveillance drives or pro variants, I would not worry about this. That is what an HDD should easily withstand 24/7 for years. If ones runs roon´s internal database on an HDD causing the heads to go crazy, I would see more reason to worry.
The Roon app is just installed wherever it needs to be with the Package Center. I don’t find that particularly controversial.
For the Roon database, in my case, I have it in a dedicated volume (Storage Pool 2) on which I have a Shared Folder I call “Roon SSD.” I point Roon on NAS there during install, and it creates its “Roon on NAS” folder in there.
Once Roon is running, I have it point to whatever folder(s) I wish. I happen to use the “music” folder that is shared with Synology Audio Station, but it can be whatever I want.
[Edited to remove snippy tone. Sorry about that @DDPS].
I thought Docker might help debug this given the absence of any impact from the package itself (I have no idea if there is any) and given that you can control where the app folder is. Maybe it would have, maybe not.
Thanks for pointing this out. I tend to forget this is the case. I switched from the package to Docker during the somewhat extended period when the package was broken by DSM 7.x. I think we might be better off with Docker as a supported platform in preference to the package, but that’s just my apparently unpopular opinion
I appreciate you clarifying in case the original poster considers trying it.
