New to NAS--Good place to start?

[Carson Dyle]

probably limited by the crappy hardware in the nas box before the network connection

my statement was as arbitrary as the person I was replying too, who was complaining that RAID doesn't save you from user error

nothing saves you from user error

Except a backup. That was the point.

 

[taltamir]

After running a NAS for about 2-3 weeks now, I've come to realize how useless RAID is. I think raid is only useful if you want 100% uptime. As far as using it as a "backup," well it won't save your bacon if you accidentally delete a whole folder worth of stuff. The folder will be deleted on BOTH drives.

RAID is extremely useful.
But with very few rare exception it isn't performance that it is useful for.
if you just want performance, eschew the raid

 

[gea]

RAID is extremely useful.
But with very few rare exception it isn't performance that it is useful for.
if you just want performance, eschew the raid

If you look at modern software raid like ZFS or better hardware raidcards and ignore some bad raid solutions, the opposite is true

If a single disk has a sequential and io performance of 1
you can expect (if not bus or cpu limited)

raid-1:
read sequential: 2
read io: 2
write sequential: 1
write io: 1

raid-5/6 or ZFS Z1/2/3
read sequential: n x datadisks
read io: 1
write sequential: n x datadisks
write io: 1

In case of a ZFS pool this is per vdev
if you add more vdevs (raid), performance scale with number of vdves

 

[Zargon]

Except a backup. That was the point.

until the user deletes the backup ()🙂

 

[taltamir]

If you look at modern software raid like ZFS or better hardware raidcards and ignore some bad raid solutions, the opposite is true

you mean there are EXCEPTIONS? its almost like I explicitly said so!
I am going to have to disagree with you about ZFS raid5/6 performance though.

 

[Sho'Nuff]

Sorry to resurrect an old thread, but I am in a similar boat as the OP and I am thinking about picking up the Synology DS214Play and populating it with a couple HGST 4TB NAS drives. I want to use it for the following applications:

1. As a media server to feed multiple ipads, iphones, and a couple TVs.

2. A place to centrally back up said ipads and iphones, as well asmy home pc.

3. As network storage for a huge (85,000+) number of photos, some home videos, and ~1.5TB worth of client files. Photos and videos would be primarily stored on my home desktop and backed daily to one of the NAS drives. Other files (photos, videos, etc.) would be stored on the other drive. Obviously I am not considering a RAID array for the NAS as it does not make sense in my application and I don't want to spend almost twice as much for the synology 415play or other 4 bay NAS just so that I can use RAID.

Two factors are driving the decision to use a NAS vs. an internet/cloud backup solution, namely: 1) affordable internet storage for sensitive data such as attorney client privileged information is hard to come by (just look at the difference in price for HIPAA compliant storage and you will see what I mean). The NAS keeps the data in my control (for the most part); and 2) the NAS would give me dedicated local storage for client files that is separate from my home PC. That way if my PC craps the bed (possible as I tinker with it all the time), I still have access to the files on the NAS.

Main factor driving the selection of the DS214play is its hardware transcoding features. I know they are not supported by plex (yet), but I've read that the Synology apps are pretty good and would likely serve my media related purposes for the foreseeable future. A nice secondary feature is that the DS214play is expandable.

I also do realize that the most cost effective and powerful solution would be to build my own linux server. I do not have the time nor the inclination to do that. 5 years ago I would have, but for the applications noted above I just want something that works.

Thoughts? Recommendations?

 

[Carson Dyle]

My first thought is that if that data is important (and irreplaceable), get yourself a second level of backup. I would use an external drive. Taking it just one step further, store that drive in a safe place off site, such as at your office or in a safe deposit box. Do your daily backups to the file server, then once or twice a month, back that up to your external.

Seems rather a pricey solution if your main goal is to to have their transcoding. I'd do some research into other software to achieve the same thing that could be installed on either a Windows, Linux, or BSD file server. I'd also carefully read some reviews of the Synology, and pay attention to the transcoding limitations cited.

 

[Sho'Nuff]

My first thought is that if that data is important (and irreplaceable), get yourself a second level of backup. I would use an external drive. Taking it just one step further, store that drive in a safe place off site, such as at your office or in a safe deposit box. Do your daily backups to the file server, then once or twice a month, back that up to your external.

Seems rather a pricey solution if your main goal is to to have their transcoding. I'd do some research into other software to achieve the same thing that could be installed on either a Windows, Linux, or BSD file server. I'd also carefully read some reviews of the Synology, and pay attention to the transcoding limitations cited.

Yeah I definitely agree that a cheaper and better option for a media server would be to build a linux server or use a mac mini. But I want something that can double as a media server while performing the primary function of large scale mass storage. I also want something that is turnkey out of the box.

I do realize that the synology transcoding is not supported by plex, and that they have a licensing issue related to one of the sound formats.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

There is no reason except cost to not use RAID.

No. RAID is not a backup.
No. RAID will not protect you from user error.
No. RAID will not keep your house from burning down.
No. RAID will not make your ethernet faster.
No. RAID is not always faster than a single drive. (It depends on workload and RAID level. Different tasks are better suited for different - or no - RAID levels.)

What RAID WILL do is twofold.

1) Recovering from a (inevitable) hard drive failure is easy-peasy and your kids don't yell at you because the PLEX server is down on a Saturday afternoon. (Just watch a movie kids, dad's gonna run over to Best Buy.)

2) YMMV, but IMO managing a single big pool of storage is easier and simpler than managing multiple separate HDDs. (10x 1TB drives are presented as a single 8TB volume and behave accordingly. Want to throw 2TB of data into a single folder? No problem.)

 

[Carson Dyle]

1) Recovering from a (inevitable) hard drive failure is easy-peasy and your kids don't yell at you because the PLEX server is down on a Saturday afternoon.

_IF_ uptime is critical, it may be worth spending the extra money for a RAID solution. But many people, believe it or not, can actually survive for a few days without access to their StarWars movie collection or their massive trove of 1990s midget porn.

Recovering from a disk failure with a backup is pretty damned easy. For highly static data like photos, videos and ripped music and movies, it's especially relevant, because frequent backups aren't required.

2) YMMV, but IMO managing a single big pool of storage is easier and simpler than managing multiple separate HDDs. (10x 1TB drives are presented as a single 8TB volume and behave accordingly. Want to throw 2TB of data into a single folder? No problem.)

Easier, sure. But easier than what? Keeping movies on drive E:, TV shows on drive F: and photos on drive G:? Not exactly rocket science. And if we're talking about the RAID 1 offered by many of the overpriced, two-drive NAS devices, there is no storage pool created.

 

[Carson Dyle]

One thing I will grant... If you're NOT going to backup your data, using RAID (hardware, software, or even a non-realtime parity solution) is better than nothing. And let's face it, once you have 50 or 60TB of media files that you've collected through various means, you're not going to be backing it all up.

 

[Jeff7181]

One thing I will grant... If you're NOT going to backup your data, using RAID (hardware, software, or even a non-realtime parity solution) is better than nothing. And let's face it, once you have 50 or 60TB of media files that you've collected through various means, you're not going to be backing it all up.

Unless you have an unlimited cloud backup solution and decent Internet connection.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

_IF_ uptime is critical, it may be worth spending the extra money for a RAID solution. But many people, believe it or not, can actually survive for a few days without access to their StarWars movie collection or their massive trove of 1990s midget porn.

D:

*faints*

Recovering from a disk failure with a backup is pretty damned easy. For highly static data like photos, videos and ripped music and movies, it's especially relevant, because frequent backups aren't required.

If you have onsite backup, true. Offsite? I have Crashplan. It took me six months to do an initial seed and would probably take a couple weeks to download it all again.

Why is that okay with me? Because I can't afford to build a second NAS box to back up the first.

Easier, sure. But easier than what? Keeping movies on drive E:, TV shows on drive F: and photos on drive G:? Not exactly rocket science.

*sigh*

You're overestimating people and their level of interest.

It's all well and good to be Nick Burns and tell people, "well, learn or GTFO" - hell, it feels good. But long term, you can't get away with that and keep your job. Or domestic tranquility.

Go the extra mile once in a while. Make something neat, that allows somebody you care about to do something fun or cool, or even just chillax, without having to learn a crapton of extra rules, or remember the difference between a UNC path and a drive letter mapping.

*shrug*

And if we're talking about the RAID 1 offered by many of the overpriced, two-drive NAS devices, there is no storage pool created.

Well, yeah, I'll grant you that one.

 

[Sho'Nuff]

So I ended up pulling the trigger on the Synology 214play. Going to populate it with a couple of Hitachi 4GB drives. Will report back once I get it up and running.

 

[QueHuong]

Very helpful thread on RAID guys. I bought a QNAP TS-251 with the same intent as the OP and am starting to slowly realize it's not that great of a backup solution. Additional questions:

- RAID only protects against total HD failures right? Will it protect against corrupted files being written? For example, I'm a photography enthusiast and have over 1 TB of photos. If the transfer from memory card to the NAS results in file corruption, will RAID help?
- Is there a system for versioning of files? For example, I edit a doc and save and close, then decide I want the old version. Or if I accidentally a folder and emptied the trash, then want to get it back. What would help in this case?
- I have a Crashplan account to backup my Macbook. Will it backup my NAS too? If so, is a RAID 1 + Crashplan backup a reasonably good backup system?

 

[abekl]

I cant believe nobody is mentioning the Asusstor NAS units. They just refreshed their lineup and have new 2 and 4 bay units with ample processors and memory right out of the box.

I just bought the Asustor AS5104T, a 4 bay unit, and couldn't be happier with the transfer speeds.