Support network attached storage (NAS)

[maximeag]

Is there any plan to add support for Tablo recordings on a NAS ?
Have you guys done any testing yet ?

[TabloTV]

Sorry @maximeag. This isn’t something that’s on the roadmap. It’s just too difficult to support the various network speeds of a NAS.

[Scott_Curtis]

Are you still working on a way to export/archive completed recordings to a NAS?

[TabloTV]

Yes @Scott_Curtis - download for offline storage/viewing is definitely on the to-do list! We’ve been chatting about how we want to implement this recently. I’m hopeful it will be in one of the next few releases.

[Scott_Curtis]

It would be really cool if there were some kind of automated way to do it, such as all completed recordings or all recordings over a certain age or keep the most recent three episodes in Tablo and export the rest.

[TabloTV]

We’ll keep that in mind!

I’d like to see an ‘export by series’ option so you can just hit one button and get the whole season/series at once. However, I am not an engineer so I’m not sure what’s possible.

[Jestep]

You can take a look at my tool to export until Tablo officially supports it

Tablo Exporter - Export Tablo Recordings

Oh things have changed quite a bit since then. It now has a queue and might take care of that issue for you. However, you have to download ffmpeg and include the path to the exe. So, you need to download ffmpeg for your OS from here: https://www.ffmpeg.org/download.html And then download the Tablo Exporter from: http://jettsoft.com/products.html Point your ffmpeg file to the executable for your OS, point to the output directory Double click on the Tablo to load the Tablo data. Select t…

[Alnico]

This is a poor excuse. Attachment via iSCSI supported by many NAS devices can, if the network is designed right, more than exceed what can traverse the USB port. Please implement iSCSI as an option, with a throughput test feature exposed to the user and a ‘let the user beware and bear the risk of use’ caveat if needed.

[mcouture]

This would be great

[beastman]

Any update? It’s been over a year.

[beastman]

IF Tablo had gigabit or Wireless AC SUPPORT, then NASCAR device might have worked.

[TheZ]

If Tablo can save to the cloud (which is nothing more than a remote NAS), why can’t it save to a local NAS?

[FlyingDiver]

If Tablo can save to the cloud (which is nothing more than a remote NAS), why can’t it save to a local NAS?

First, the Tablo cloud storage has very little resemblance to a local NAS. Except for the fact they’re both accessed over a network.

To use a local NAS, the Tablo would need to support a LAN file sharing protocol, probably SMB (aka CIFS). To use their own cloud storage, the Tablo can use their own possibly proprietary protocol. I expect it’s more akin to HTTP than SMB, transferring each hts file as it’s closed.

But the harder part is configuring the NAS. You would need the whole network discovery stack, plus UI for selecting the share and providing authentication credentials. Implemented in how many different clients?

And then there’s the support burden. For the cloud storage, they’re dealing with one provider, themselves. For NAS units, there are hundreds out there. And can all of them handle the bandwidth required for a maxed out quad tuner? Four write streams and six read clients at the same time?

And all that work for what percentage of their customers?

[TheZ]

can all of them handle the bandwidth required for a maxed out quad tuner?

That’s nonsense. Cloud storage has to go out over the internet, which will always have less bandwidth than a local NAS.

I can understand not wanting to develop apps for various NAS systems, but I’m not asking for that. I’m asking why network speeds and bandwidth are given as excuses for not supporting network storage when cloud storage is network storage.

What are the cloud servers running? Why can’t Tablo owners run something similar on the local network, and point the Tablo there?

As for the support burden, Tablo already relies on owners to develop and maintain basic functions like the ability to export recordings, so it’s hard to imagine how there would be any support burden. Instead, with a little transparency on the cloud storage process, it’s likely someone will develop the solutions for local storage at no cost to Tablo.

The only possible downside seems to be the risk that Tablo might sell fewer cloud subscriptions. But they already make money on the hardware and the guide data subscription, so that’s BS.

[TabloTV]

And then there’s the support burden. For the cloud storage, they’re dealing with one provider, themselves. For NAS units, there are hundreds out there. And can all of them handle the bandwidth required for a maxed out quad tuner? Four write streams and six read clients at the same time?

This is 90% of why we haven’t done this.

We already spend a significant amount of time working with folks on solidifying their antenna setups and home networks.

Troubleshooting NAS speeds is not something we’d like to get into.

[FlyingDiver]

So I’m confused. Are you asking why Tablo doesn’t support NAS storage? Or why they won’t publish the specs of their cloud servers?

You keep dismissing the support issues of any complicated features to a product. They’re not trivial. Tablo does NOT support any of the programs that extract recordings. In fact, they hide the API used to do that behind an NDA. They have no support burden for any of those.

Even if they were transparent about the cloud storage, how are you going to force the Tablo to use a local server instead of the cloud server? Heck, if you use Wireshark you could probably reverse-engineer the protocol without any help from Tablo.

[Nilex]

can all of them handle the bandwidth required for a maxed out quad tuner?

I think this is a very valid question. The only Tablo product that currently supports cloud is the DUAL Lite and it’s only 2 tuner.

[FlyingDiver]

Cloud storage has to go out over the internet, which will always have less bandwidth than a local NAS.

I call nonsense in turn. Yes, the Internet connection will have less bandwidth than the local LAN. But I’ve seen some low-end NAS units which are incredibly slow. For example, my WD My Passport Pro is a NAS. It could never keep up with a Tablo.

[djk44883]

First, the Tablo cloud storage has very little resemblance to a local NAS. Except for the fact they’re both accessed over a network.

Fundamentally isn’t that what each is? Accessing storage over a network.

To use a local NAS, the Tablo would need to support a LAN file sharing protocol, probably SMB (aka CIFS). To use their own cloud storage, the Tablo can use their own possibly proprietary protocol. I expect it’s more akin to HTTP than SMB, transferring each hts file as it’s closed.

I get where you’re going, but a NAS can be configured with various protocols like ftp, for example. Isn’t could storage more static instead of being shared? More as it’s served or sent to the client.

But the harder part is configuring the NAS. You would need the whole network discovery stack, plus UI for selecting the share and providing authentication credentials. Implemented in how many different clients?

That’s probably it! Network topology can vary so much. But for the minority that would want this, that have configured their own NAS, would have a clue how to configure it – if made available. Theoretically the device could operate on the local network, it has an http server and storage for data. I gather a big issue is network discovery (among other things.)

And then there’s the support burden. For the cloud storage, they’re dealing with one provider, themselves

The largest demographic most likely has a “specialized” antenna somewhere inside their house with high speed broadband internet that just wants to hook something up and use it.

And can all of them handle the bandwidth required for a maxed out quad tuner? Four write streams and six read clients at the same time?

As it stands, it’s limited to USB 2, and 100mbs lan port. (how much more would it have cost to up it to USB 3 and a gagabit lan port - apparently these wouldn’t benefit anyhow.)

And all that work for what percentage of their customers?

… a fraction of what you see posting in the community forums / total users

[djk44883]

Tablo already relies on owners to develop and maintain basic functions like the ability to export recordings, so it’s hard to imagine how there would be any support burden.

Where do they have the resources for owners to develop and maintain basic functions? I’d like to have access to my device. I have found some information, but if they are relying on us, we need some resources. They use open source, it’s not all proprietary.