Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 27

Thread: Re: Cheap NAS

  1. #1
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    12,993
    Thanks
    781
    Thanked
    1,591 times in 1,346 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 5900X
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200MHz ECC
      • Storage:
      • 2TB Linux, 2TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 39 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Iiyama 27" 1440p
      • Internet:
      • Zen 900Mb/900Mb (CityFibre FttP)

    Re: Cheap NAS

    Continuing the closed NAS thread outside the classifieds section...

    Quote Originally Posted by badass View Post
    This is one of the reasons I still don't bother with one of these half arsed consumer grade NASes. Your data loss (and security) just isn't seen as much of a problem to them.
    Yeah, you may have detected some indecision there.

    We have an old dual bay consumer QNAP that was bought when the company was a two person start up. It is dying, and not so much from old age but because there is a power control FET on the backplane for disc 2 that is dodgy so when the NAS gets a bit warm it cuts power to that drive and runs degraded. There is a long support forum thread on this, as it seems a common thing for those FETs to fry. That's pretty bad, specially when our QNAP has only ever had SSDs plugged in so very low power being passed.

    For our light use, that's actually not as bad as it sounds. The thing is heavily backed up, we wouldn't lose much if it failed. and I think that's part of my problem. I could spend days trying to find a better NAS, and that is a loss to the company of my time. Buying a new 4 bay unit where hopefully they fixed the problem by now makes the problem go away and also allows us to expand the storage which we will likely need at some point.

    it seems odd for all the huge range that QNAP do that they still have 3.5in drive bays, when a dinky little 2.5in quad bay would be far better. It seems odd in an era of U.2 drives to still be thinking in terms of spinning rust.

  2. #2
    Super Moderator Jonj1611's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,768
    Thanks
    1,812
    Thanked
    1,027 times in 787 posts

    Re: Cheap NAS

    Sorry meant to continue that thread but got distracted
    Jon

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    3,927
    Thanks
    941
    Thanked
    986 times in 730 posts

    Re: Cheap NAS

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    ...

    it seems odd for all the huge range that QNAP do that they still have 3.5in drive bays, when a dinky little 2.5in quad bay would be far better. It seems odd in an era of U.2 drives to still be thinking in terms of spinning rust.
    Dunno about that. I am, of course, hypothesising.

    QNAP do do 2.5" drives, but I'm not sure about in the consumer range, or in 4-bay. There is a bigger one, and some mixed units. My hypothesis is that it's about who would use which, for what. I'd guess that in the small and consumer grade units, they believe that options in capacity would be more in demand than 2.5" form factor. 3.5" form factor gives what ... up to about 20TB per drive, and bigger due soon. Even a small 2-drive unit could give 20TB mirrored, or 40TB with the increased risk of no RAID (with the implied extra care in backing up carefully). I had considered a 2-bay unit as a backup for my main 4-bay unit, and that increased backup was an acceptable risk as there's an additional level of USB backup. I haven't acted on it and am more likely to just use another 4-bay.

    Anyway, the point is that I suspect 2.5" form factor in very small drives are perceived as a niche within a market segment that is already limited (i.e. most consumers probably won''t go as far s a NAS for several reasons, including complexity of setup and operation and, of course, sheer cost). That section of the consumer market willing to go for a NAS, and that even know they exist, is likely to be more interested in maximising capacity that reducing form factor. Go up a notch to SMA type units and capacity is even more important, along with better RAID than mirroring, and even other facilities like SSD cacheing, higher than 1GB LAN ports and, of course, software provided in the NAS.

    TL/DR = in the 2-bay consumer sector, capacity from 3.5" is probably seen to be (correctly, IMHO) more relevant than the smaller drive form factor.
    A lesson learned from PeterB about dignity in adversity, so Peter, In Memorium, "Onwards and Upwards".

  4. #4
    ALT0153™ Rob_B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    6,787
    Thanks
    479
    Thanked
    1,104 times in 712 posts

    Re: Cheap NAS

    It's the price for me though, if I went with a NAS I'd likely use the 1TB WD green I already have and add another for sub £40, to do that even with SATA SSDs (assuming I again already had one) then I'd be looking at maybe £100? Multiply that by the size a 'power' user needs and the market surely knows we're maybe not ready for solid state only yet?

  5. #5
    Super Moderator Jonj1611's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,768
    Thanks
    1,812
    Thanked
    1,027 times in 787 posts

    Re: Cheap NAS

    Do SSD's wear quicker in a NAS? I am talking consumer grade.
    Jon

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    3,927
    Thanks
    941
    Thanked
    986 times in 730 posts

    Re: Cheap NAS

    I'd think a large part of that is what you do with the NAS?

    I mean, if it's largely a file store with big files, then a lot less wear than constant high volumes of small read/write ops like some kind of transaction server.

    Also .... horses for courses. Get the right SSDs just like it's a good idea to get the right HDs for the use you have in mind (general purpose, high speed, extra durability/MTBF, video/surveillance, etc).
    A lesson learned from PeterB about dignity in adversity, so Peter, In Memorium, "Onwards and Upwards".

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    4,941
    Thanks
    171
    Thanked
    386 times in 313 posts
    • badass's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P8Z77-m pro
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 3570K
      • Memory:
      • 32GB
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 850 EVO, 2TB WD Green
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon RX 580
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX520W
      • Case:
      • Silverstone SG02-F
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 X64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Del U2311, LG226WTQ
      • Internet:
      • 80/20 FTTC

    Re: Cheap NAS

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    Continuing the closed NAS thread outside the classifieds section...



    Yeah, you may have detected some indecision there.

    We have an old dual bay consumer QNAP that was bought when the company was a two person start up. It is dying, and not so much from old age but because there is a power control FET on the backplane for disc 2 that is dodgy so when the NAS gets a bit warm it cuts power to that drive and runs degraded. There is a long support forum thread on this, as it seems a common thing for those FETs to fry. That's pretty bad, specially when our QNAP has only ever had SSDs plugged in so very low power being passed.

    For our light use, that's actually not as bad as it sounds. The thing is heavily backed up, we wouldn't lose much if it failed. and I think that's part of my problem. I could spend days trying to find a better NAS, and that is a loss to the company of my time. Buying a new 4 bay unit where hopefully they fixed the problem by now makes the problem go away and also allows us to expand the storage which we will likely need at some point.

    it seems odd for all the huge range that QNAP do that they still have 3.5in drive bays, when a dinky little 2.5in quad bay would be far better. It seems odd in an era of U.2 drives to still be thinking in terms of spinning rust.
    Yeah - It's all about the right tools for the job. I can't fault any of your logic and would probably do the same myself. Should your company grow some more that's probably where you will need to start looking into a "proper" IT setup. I have actually worked for a company where I specified that a "cheapo consumer grade NAS" was the right tool for the job. It was used as an "IT Tools Store" and online archive for some staff - i.e. data that would have been archived to tape and deleted but might be occasionally accessed was there. It was either that or spend about £20k on a low end enterprise grade storage solution.
    "In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship."

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    4,941
    Thanks
    171
    Thanked
    386 times in 313 posts
    • badass's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P8Z77-m pro
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 3570K
      • Memory:
      • 32GB
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 850 EVO, 2TB WD Green
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon RX 580
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX520W
      • Case:
      • Silverstone SG02-F
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 X64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Del U2311, LG226WTQ
      • Internet:
      • 80/20 FTTC

    Re: Cheap NAS

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonj1611 View Post
    Do SSD's wear quicker in a NAS? I am talking consumer grade.
    I believe Some NAS's can use them as a read cache in which case they will wear quicker. Assuming they are caching for much larger storage that's frequently accessed. Otherwise I doubt there will be much of a meaningful difference.
    "In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship."

  9. #9
    Chaos Monkey Apex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Huddersfield
    Posts
    4,707
    Thanks
    1,142
    Thanked
    285 times in 204 posts
    • Apex's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Z87M-PLUS
      • CPU:
      • Intel i5-4670K
      • Memory:
      • 32 GiB
      • Storage:
      • 20 TiB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • PowerColor Radeon RX 6700 Fighter 10GB OC
      • PSU:
      • 750
      • Case:
      • Core View 21
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2721DGFA
      • Internet:
      • 200Mb nTL Cable

    Re: Cheap NAS

    @Rob_B (from the other thread)

    It's a qnap TS-459 Pro+ with 4 2Tb WD RE Drives in - WD2003FYYS

  10. #10
    Super Moderator Jonj1611's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,768
    Thanks
    1,812
    Thanked
    1,027 times in 787 posts

    Re: Cheap NAS

    That's a nice NAS mate. Wish I had got it, the eBay bloke is buggering me around! Such is life lol
    Jon

  11. #11
    Chaos Monkey Apex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Huddersfield
    Posts
    4,707
    Thanks
    1,142
    Thanked
    285 times in 204 posts
    • Apex's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Z87M-PLUS
      • CPU:
      • Intel i5-4670K
      • Memory:
      • 32 GiB
      • Storage:
      • 20 TiB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • PowerColor Radeon RX 6700 Fighter 10GB OC
      • PSU:
      • 750
      • Case:
      • Core View 21
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2721DGFA
      • Internet:
      • 200Mb nTL Cable

    Re: Cheap NAS

    Quote Originally Posted by badass View Post
    I believe Some NAS's can use them as a read cache in which case they will wear quicker. Assuming they are caching for much larger storage that's frequently accessed. Otherwise I doubt there will be much of a meaningful difference.
    Depends on the type of SSD in use, a read cache doesn't cause issues for NAND, its when it comes to writing to that same NAND that the wear is created.

  12. #12
    Chaos Monkey Apex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Huddersfield
    Posts
    4,707
    Thanks
    1,142
    Thanked
    285 times in 204 posts
    • Apex's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Z87M-PLUS
      • CPU:
      • Intel i5-4670K
      • Memory:
      • 32 GiB
      • Storage:
      • 20 TiB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • PowerColor Radeon RX 6700 Fighter 10GB OC
      • PSU:
      • 750
      • Case:
      • Core View 21
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2721DGFA
      • Internet:
      • 200Mb nTL Cable

    Re: Cheap NAS

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonj1611 View Post
    That's a nice NAS mate. Wish I had got it, the eBay bloke is buggering me around! Such is life lol
    Running or was running QTS 4.2.6 - its been used has a backup target from my main NAS for stuff i just could not afford to have go bang at the time, now surplus to requirement.

    There is in the back of my head is a worry over this NAS unit(s), with off the shelf bits if something goes wrong we can replace the hardware cheaply, these NAS units, you are SOL if outside of warrantee for a lot of the problems.

  13. #13
    Super Moderator Jonj1611's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,768
    Thanks
    1,812
    Thanked
    1,027 times in 787 posts

    Re: Cheap NAS

    I had read that before, something about if it goes wrong it its either expensive repair or scrap
    Jon

  14. #14
    Chaos Monkey Apex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Huddersfield
    Posts
    4,707
    Thanks
    1,142
    Thanked
    285 times in 204 posts
    • Apex's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Z87M-PLUS
      • CPU:
      • Intel i5-4670K
      • Memory:
      • 32 GiB
      • Storage:
      • 20 TiB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • PowerColor Radeon RX 6700 Fighter 10GB OC
      • PSU:
      • 750
      • Case:
      • Core View 21
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2721DGFA
      • Internet:
      • 200Mb nTL Cable

    Re: Cheap NAS

    More worried about the DS1815+ then the QNap (not seen many folks say they have had issues with that)

    If i could just stop being a pack rat with all this data i could free myself of the need but i don't trust cloud storage one bit to keep MY data away from folks.

  15. #15
    Super Moderator Jonj1611's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,768
    Thanks
    1,812
    Thanked
    1,027 times in 787 posts

    Re: Cheap NAS

    I use cloud storage with icloud but if any of that gets lost I have backups of that but I couldn't ever upload something to cloud storage and not have it elsewhere as well. Just too many question marks over it imo
    Jon

  16. #16
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    12,993
    Thanks
    781
    Thanked
    1,591 times in 1,346 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 5900X
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200MHz ECC
      • Storage:
      • 2TB Linux, 2TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 39 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Iiyama 27" 1440p
      • Internet:
      • Zen 900Mb/900Mb (CityFibre FttP)

    Re: Cheap NAS

    Quote Originally Posted by Saracen999 View Post
    TL/DR = in the 2-bay consumer sector, capacity from 3.5" is probably seen to be (correctly, IMHO) more relevant than the smaller drive form factor.
    That seems to be the repeated truth, I'm just not sure it holds water any more. You can get a big single 3.5inch HDD, but that disk is 4 times the volume of a 2.5in drive so in the enterprise storage space where rack density and performance are important the switch to 2.5in gave more storage per slot in the rack and spread the load across more drives hence improving performance. The switch to U.2 is ott for most people, but you can get adaptors that should be really cheap if made in volume to allow the use of consumer NVMe drives in a standard U.2 slot: https://www.amazon.co.uk/StarTech-co.../dp/B073W65QX6

    Then there's the whole issue of noise from spinning rust, specially most of the NAS rated ones.

    If money were no object, then I would be going for something like: https://www.scan.co.uk/products/giga...x-25-u2-hot-sw


    Quote Originally Posted by Jonj1611 View Post
    Do SSD's wear quicker in a NAS? I am talking consumer grade.
    That completely depends on your use case. Our NAS doesn't get that much written to it, so the SSDs in there get a far easier life than if they were in a Windows PC. Well, apart from the occasional raid rebuild because the stupid backplane dropped drive 2 out again, grrr

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •