Question SSD: reliability at low cost?

[pol098]

I am looking at updating my storage. At present I am using a computer with a pair of drives in RAID1 (mirror) configuration essentially as a file server, not for computer applications. SSDs noted for reliability are expensive, and never 100% reliable anyway. My requirement is simply to store files, preferably accessible over a network. Local USB connection is also possible. I am not doing many massive file transfers or playing intensive games, so fastest performance is not an issue.

My proposed solution is to use a pair of cheap SSDs of the same, largish, capacity, but preferably different manufacture (less likely to fail at about the same time) in an external enclosure configured as RAID1 mirror. There don't seem to be any small enclosures with network RJ45 connection, so either use USB, or use a NAS enclosure designed for bigger drives (with adaptors). I would look for drives with decent Total Bytes Written (TBW) endurance, but not worry too much about reliability (I think most SSDs are decently reliable; RAID is Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks after all, even if some say "Independent" instead, as against SLED (Single, Large, Expensive Disk).

If using USB only, another issue is whether to use the built-in RAID1 support of an enclosure, or configure it as 2 separate drives (JBOD), with the host computer mirroring them with software RAID. JBOD disadvantage: won't work as mirror if connected to a different host. Possible advantage: doesn't depend on the RAID controller not failing. (But mirrored drives probably are accessible separately without the controller; the old nightmare was failure of the controller of a proprietary RAID5 setup with data distributed over several drives.)

I'd be interested in opinions on this approach - thanks.

Also, are there adaptors allowing USB-connected drives to connect to a network via cable with RJ45 connector?

 

[marokra]

Orico makes a dual slot enclosure. There's also the QNAP 4x nvme NAS - a bit more expensive, but has RJ45 and room for future growth.

If it's just a backup target, and performance isn't super important, I'd go for a Raspberry Pi + the Piberry HAT (there are cases that can accommodate this), load Trunas and call it a day. I'd want ZFS for this, one way or another. There are SBCs that have 2+ NVME slots, but they tend to be too expensive for something like this.

 

[pol098]

Thanks for suggestions marokra, very useful. I've also seen a very small computer running Windows with 6 M.2 SSD slots for well under £400 - a lot cheaper than the QNAP. The Orico doesn't support RAID1, I believe. There are inexpensive dual USB-only enclosures that support RAID1, though I don't know how reliable. The Perplexity search engine found a few, none with network connection. I think my Internet modem/router supports a USB drive, which solves the network availability question. (I wasn't allowed to post when I included enclosure names, potential advertising?)

Are there any opinions on using a pair of mirrored cheap SSDs instead of one reputed to be reliable?

 

[marokra]

Thanks for reminding me, I forgot the Beelink: https://www.bee-link.com/products/beelink-me-mini-n150

I'm using two dirt cheap (TeamGroup's cheapest, when they just started showing up on Amazon) SATA SSDs as the ARC in my ZFS Pool. I don't know how representative that is of data drives in a NAS, but I guess that depends on how heavily you write to it. I have a handful of cheap to mid NVME SSDs that are way way way past their max TBW - one failed at over 100x its max TBW. The only SSD I've had fail on me was a Samsung 980 Pro...

SSDs can and do fail, but I suspect it's more down to sample quality or heat than ordinary wear. I know from work (datacenter stuff) that SSDs are much more reliable than HDDs, but here we're talking about enterprise drives in both cases - so again, I don't know how representative that is of cheap SSDs.

 

[kschendel]

...The only SSD I've had fail on me was a Samsung 980 Pro...

Oddly enough, I have a similar experience, although it wasn't a 980 Pro. (It was a 256GB SATA drive and I don't recall the model, Samsung PM-something-or-other.) I have 25 SSD's of one sort or another in the room with me, with the oldest one being 8 years old and in active use as a boot drive.

For reliability, I'd probably try to avoid QLC, mostly out of FUD more than any real worry about hitting a TBW limit. Aside from that, I don't know that there is a real life huge variability among drives as far as failure rate goes.