would a NAS be a sufficient file server ??

[NovoCainE]

hi everyone.. i've been running linux based servers in my workplace...and actually, aside from the ineptability off the IT staff.. and the lack of tech savvy among all the employee... the system works fine it's been running from 2001 all through 2014 with problems which only arise from the user(s), and / hardware malfunction...since i'm pretty much on my own in tackling the server related side of things... i'd like to ask you guys about my options..

1. Windows Server ( Don't really want to..due to virus and how costly it would be to implement ) but, hey the older IT guys know better ...right ??? 😛

2. NAS Solutions from companies such Synology, Asustor (i'm leaning towards this)

3. Another linux server build.

my question is :
would a NAS solution be sufficient to handle fileserver functions in a small company of <100 active users, with a sum of todal data roughly within 4 TB. nothing fancy, no streaming transcoding or anything of the sort, simply a windows fileserver, file types consists of office spreadsheets,documents, and autocad drawings, i'll probably set-up a dedicated, print,mail server on a dedicated box

any input is appreciated, thanks in advance

 

[azazel1024]

Yeah, sure, it would probably work well. I'd go with one of the slightly more advanced options with two LAN ports for link aggregation and I'd run at least 3 disks in RAID5 for performance and up time.

If possible, depending on what kind of performance you need, I'd look at an option that allows an SSD cache so that commonly accessed files can be cached on that if you need really high performance, probably using a 60-120GB SSD as the cache.

I'd do basically the same setup if building a Windows box. The only advantage there is it might be somewhat cheaper or probably somewhat higher performance for the same price as the NAS. You'd also have a lot more options for back-up, flexibility, etc.

Since this is for a business I'd buy a pair of NAS or a pair of windows servers (or a pair of Linux servers) so that they can back each other up, both for hardware and data. You probably don't need to load balance anything with a setup that small, but having a warm backup of the hardware would be a good idea and having periodic backups from the hot server to the warm server (hourly, daily?) mandatory.

Especially a linux/windows server you'd have the advantage of more easily running both machines as both file and print/mail servers and again backing each other up.

On top of that expandability and flexibility. Find that two network ports is a bit of a handicap, okay, add another network card, or swap a dual port card for a quad port. Or storage is too slow, more options on SSD caching, or changing it up for a RAID6 or RAID10 solution. You can do some of that with a NAS, but your options are more limited and likely spending more money for the same options if you are moving beyond a 2 bay consumer level NAS.

The NAS deffinitely has the advantage of being as close to PnP as you can get and likely simpler to administer, tech support and warranty, at least as compared to rolling your own.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

hi everyone.. i've been running linux based servers in my workplace...and actually, aside from the ineptability off the IT staff.. and the lack of tech savvy among all the employee... the system works fine it's been running from 2001 all through 2014 with problems which only arise from the user(s), and / hardware malfunction...since i'm pretty much on my own in tackling the server related side of things... i'd like to ask you guys about my options..

1. Windows Server ( Don't really want to..due to virus and how costly it would be to implement ) but, hey the older IT guys know better ...right ??? 😛

Errr, what? Any properly built Windows Server runs a firewall and AV. I've never seen a Windows Server in a corporate environment hit with a virus.

2. NAS Solutions from companies such Synology, Asustor (i'm leaning towards this)

3. Another linux server build.

I hope you're not just downloading random Linux distributions and building servers and instead, have a support agreement of some sort.

my question is :
would a NAS solution be sufficient to handle fileserver functions in a small company of <100 active users, with a sum of todal data roughly within 4 TB. nothing fancy, no streaming transcoding or anything of the sort, simply a windows fileserver, file types consists of office spreadsheets,documents, and autocad drawings, i'll probably set-up a dedicated, print,mail server on a dedicated box

any input is appreciated, thanks in advance

A NAS would probably work well, but don't go really low-end and make sure you get a support agreement. Also, azazel1024 has some great suggestions as well.

The bottom line is this: this is for a business and the business likely depends on those documents to survive. Make sure you plan for redundancy, disasters, and have a good backup plan in place.

 

[Cerb]

would a NAS be a sufficient file server ??

By definition, yes. NAS = file server.

1. Windows Server ( Don't really want to..due to virus and how costly it would be to implement ) but, hey the older IT guys know better ...right ??? 😛

Nobody should be running anything on it, so virii should not be a problem. Cost may be, due to the license(s). It never ceases to amaze me that back-end IT ends up so budget-constrained, when supporting users that need tens of thousands of dollars of software to do anything.

2. NAS Solutions from companies such Synology, Asustor (i'm leaning towards this)

Synology, Buffalo, and Drobo, at the least, offer business support. Not sure about Asus, and definitely wouldn't get QNAP.

3. Another linux server build.

Maybe? Just make sure to figure in your needs and costs over time, just like with a Windows server.

i'll probably set-up a dedicated, print,mail server on a dedicated box

Print, sure. But, mail? Really? Are there regulatory requirements that cause you to need to have that local?

Do you need NTFS ACLs?

That is the only thing that really matters. If the answer is no, then any kind of NAS will do, be it a Windows PC, Linux PC, or Linux appliance. If the answer is yes, then you want a Windows server, because Samba's support for transparent use of NTFS ACLs is still lacking.