NAS Recomendations

[Prashun Patel]

I've been using a Buffalo Terastation for my small business for about 3 years. It's been too finicky this past year, and I'm looking for a replacement.

Any recs?

[John M Wilson]

I also used to have a Buffalo Terastation, and got tired of its quirks.

I purchased an HP Mediasmart Homeserver, and have been delighted.

It has ample storage, but more importantly, it uses the MS Home Server software, which is based on a very solid server foundation, and adds just enough user interface to make it easy to network and maintain.

There are a couple of different models out there, so you can check out which one best meets your needs. I would recommend the EX495 or th EX490, depending on how much you want to pay for the OEM drives.

Adding additional drives is literally a "snap", and just about any SATA drive is plug and play, so you can pick up storage fairly cheap.

Good luck!

[Neal Clayton]

build one and go with freenas.

the benefits are many...

a) ability to add any type of *nix app that will run on freebsd to the NAS itself
b) plain ole x86 hardware, you're not screwed if a power supply or motherboard dies
c) ZFS > linux raid (which all of the commercial ones use) for many reasons (http://www.tummy.com/journals/entries/jafo_20080705_014618), a list of the highlights being..



the array is on the drives, not tied to the hardware, you can take the drives and put them in another machine running the same OS and it will fire right up
the write hole (http://blogs.sun.com/bonwick/entry/raid_z) is fixed
the OS can run on a memory stick, no OS-on-the-array which is a terrible design that many commercial NAS boxes use (if the array dies the OS crashes so you can't recover it without fixing the array...). since flash drives last essentially forever as long as they are only read and not written to, there's no worry of array corruption affecting the underlying OS.
it checks data not just against the parity on the extra drive, but against the filesystem journal as well, persistently, even on reads, so it will know of a drive being flaky well before even SMART knows, unlike ext3 which is not very reliable in case of certain hardware issues (http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&q=ext3+journal+corruption+power+failure&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=fad0bccbc44b8016)
due to the array being on the disks, and not in any way linked to the hardware, you can upgrade the machine any time you like, even part by part, up to and including replacing the drive controller, motherboard, whatever, and the raid array will not care. moving the array to a new motherboard, controller, etc is a process of about 3 clicks and 5 seconds
no downtime for filesystem checks, it does that on the fly. kiss those 30+ hour 'volume check' fsck downtimes goodbye


caveats...

1) it likes ram, recommend 2 gigs. my machine was built for small and quiet as the primary concern, and it is a bit slow on writes with only 1 gig of ram, but reads are ok.

2) freenas is currently in the process of a new major revision with a UI overhaul, that isn't out yet. so for the meantime the way you get all this is using the development builds that have the current ZFS version but the old web UI. everything in the old UI works, though, so it's not really a detriment to using the software, it just could be prettier in some places ;). current thread with links to stable testing builds are here (https://sourceforge.net/apps/phpbb/freenas/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=1751&start=40).

i've tested it after migrating up to and including putting known bad drives in the system, hot swapping bad drives for shaky drives, moving the OS to random other storage medium and hardware, and have not managed to get it to fail. currently storing about 1200 gigs on a 2tb array, no issues.

i use a sata to CF (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16812186099&cm_re=sata_to_cf-_-12-186-099-_-Product) adapter to boot the OS from to keep everything internal, but that's personal preference, if your motherboard can boot to a USB key that would work just as well to install the OS on.

if you want to keep the machine small, these (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007627+600009028+600029917&QksAutoSuggestion=&ShowDeactivatedMark=False&Configurator=&IsNodeId=1&Subcategory=280&description=&Ntk=&CFG=&SpeTabStoreType=&srchInDesc=) motherboards have 6 sata ports + an eSATA port, giving you a 6 drive array to start with plus external expandability.

[Prashun Patel]

Man, this is great information. But to be honest, I want a brainless solution. I'd like the drives to be preinstalled and formatted. I just want to point it to my domain controller and go.

My server and data is already daily backed up to a secure 'bdr' device which is backed up to an offsite 'cloud'. The NAS I'm looking for is a duplicate backup for less-than-fatal recoveries of files. So it doesn't need to be ultrafast, or huge, or that feature rich.

Synology devices get good reviews. Anyone use any of those?

[Stephen Massman]

I would recommend ReadyNas. I have one and also a Iomega Storcenter and the ReadyNas is a lot better.

[Matt Meiser]

No recommendations other than that there was recently a discussion where people liked the ReadyNas units. Watching this thread closely as I'm thinking about a NAS for backing up my Windows Home Server instead of a PC with a USB drive.

[Darius Ferlas]

I have been using the previous release of this QNAP (http://www.qnap.com/pro_detail_hardware.asp?p_id=148) NAS for the last 2 years. No issues.

[Prashun Patel]

I want something that's a little more industrial than a homeserver solution. I do have to set some permissions for access, which I'm hoping can be dl'd from the Domain controller.

The Terastation is Linux and can only import the user list; it can't enforce group level permissions. We're only 30 people in the company, but you'd be surprised how many security groups we got!!!

[Matt Meiser]

Since you want Windows Domain integration, why not just buy a fairly inexpensive server and load it up with SATA drives as needed? Or since its for backup and I assume doesn't see many concurrent users, maybe even a desktop OS.

[Jerome Stanek]

I have heard good things about the Drobo NAS. I use an Ximeta NAS that I like It only has a 250 gig hard drive in it but for what I do that is plenty.

[Bryan Morgan]

At work we use the Terastations as our "beater/throwaway" NAS devices. Their AD integration is flaky at best. Our "good" stuff is by Stonefly and NetApp, but its very expensive. I've also read good things about the ReadyNAS devices... if I were needing a small NAS that is what I'd go with, currently. Or build an OpenFiler box for a couple hundred bucks (I never had any luck with FreeNAS...it is slow and couldn't handle big files...maybe its fixed though, I don't know).

[Eric DeSilva]

+1 for ReadyNAS. I've got a 6TB ReadyNAS Pro, and like it. I also started with the Buffalo Terastations, and the ReadyNAS Pro seems as lot more industrial strength. I also like the idea of being able to hot swap drives in my ReadyNAS--I've done it now twice, and its worked flawlessly. My recollection was that there was no tracking of SMART errors on the Buffalo, whereas the ReadyNAS gives you a reallocated sector count that is helpful.

The other thing I really like about the ReadyNAS is that you can use a checkbox to install SqueezeCenter, which is the server associated with Slim Devices products to allow distributed audio throughout my house. I use iTunes to rip/tag, then SqueezeCenter interfaces with a bunch of devices that output digital audio or analog audio to stereos in different parts of my house. Works like a dream.

[Neal Clayton]

Since you want Windows Domain integration, why not just buy a fairly inexpensive server and load it up with SATA drives as needed? Or since its for backup and I assume doesn't see many concurrent users, maybe even a desktop OS.

agree, there are even small barebones nas boxes out there if you prefer the small footprint, just get one, plug in a usb cd drive, and install windows on it if you need windows domain integration.

http://www.e-itx.com/dq45ek-a7879-nas-server-system.html

the above supports intel motherboard raid, it's software but bios controlled, not OS controlled, so there should be no issue setting it up pre-installation of the OS.

btw samba (the filesharing server every *nix uses for this sort of thing to communicate with windows) does support group permissions. might not be able to set it up in a pre-configured web-gui from netgear or Hp, but the server itself can do it, there's an active directory page on their wiki with instructions.

[Prashun Patel]

You guys are great. This is great info.

I think I am going for the ReadyNAS.

IT is a part-time hat for me, and I prefer to have as much out-of-the-box as possible.

I find - for better or worse - that I never end up scaling up my hardware. I usually just buy new, copy over, and give the old to someone down the food chain...! :):(

[Bryan Morgan]

btw samba (the filesharing server every *nix uses for this sort of thing to communicate with windows) does support group permissions. might not be able to set it up in a pre-configured web-gui from netgear or Hp, but the server itself can do it, there's an active directory page on their wiki with instructions.

As much as I love Samba and have it installed everywhere, its AD integration used in "the real world" is not there yet. It always seems to work fine in a test environment and then crap out in a live environment. Throw a Mac into the mix and its a recipe for disaster. :D

[Matt Meiser]

I know you are going with the Netgear, but in reading reviews the various Qnap and Synology devices get great reviews. Like Netgear, they are BYOD (bring your own disk) devices which the more I read the more I like the idea since the disk is by far the least reliable component and if it craps out you can just replace it--or upgrade to larger if needed.

I also read an enlightening article basically saying for SOHO use, RAID doesn't offer much value. I know in another thread there was a big debate on this but basically what it was saying is that the high-availability offered by RAID isn't that critical for SOHO use and that a backup to another, preferably remote, location would provide more value.

[Graham Wintersgill]

I have a 2 bay Synology drive at home that I am very happy with. As Matt says the drives will be the weak spot and I am very impressed with the interface and the fact that everything just works in a mixed Mac/PC enviroment.

Regards

[Eric DeSilva]

I also read an enlightening article basically saying for SOHO use, RAID doesn't offer much value. I know in another thread there was a big debate on this but basically what it was saying is that the high-availability offered by RAID isn't that critical for SOHO use and that a backup to another, preferably remote, location would provide more value.

I'm sure one point they are making is that RAID isn't really a backup anyway--RAID protects against a particular form of hardware failure, but there are lots of things that can go wrong and you should have another backup strategy. That said, there are other reasons for having a NAS--uptime in my house, with a wife that is a digital photographer, is sort of key. And the NAS serves as an always-on media server for music. But, NAS may not be worth the cost for everyone.

My big struggle is identifying a good back up strategy when you are talking about terabytes of data. On line services--in the terabyte range--are either dead slow (Mozy, Carbonite) or hugely expensive (S3). I've now evolved a three part strategy--Mozy for some critical stuff, Blu-ray optical for not-quite-as-critical stuff, and additional external drives for media files (there, I figure my original CDs are the ultimate back up).

[Matt Meiser]

That was their point Eric.

For me, the NAS is part of the backup strategy. No important data on the laptops--it all goes on our WHS which has folder duplication turned on. The NAS is going to be the backup for that, located in my shop rather than the house. Backup will be automated. Eventually if we ever get "real" broadband, critical data (i.e. photos, etc) will go to something like Carbonite.

[Eric DeSilva]

Eventually if we ever get "real" broadband, critical data (i.e. photos, etc) will go to something like Carbonite.

Backing up to Mozy is the only time I've really been upset by asymmetric data rates. Even with smokin' hot download speeds, my upload speeds are... awful. Think it took six weeks for the initial upload to Mozy with all the restarts and everything.

[Matt Meiser]

Yeah, well...try it on 3G!

[Neal Clayton]

I know you are going with the Netgear, but in reading reviews the various Qnap and Synology devices get great reviews. Like Netgear, they are BYOD (bring your own disk) devices which the more I read the more I like the idea since the disk is by far the least reliable component and if it craps out you can just replace it--or upgrade to larger if needed.

I also read an enlightening article basically saying for SOHO use, RAID doesn't offer much value. I know in another thread there was a big debate on this but basically what it was saying is that the high-availability offered by RAID isn't that critical for SOHO use and that a backup to another, preferably remote, location would provide more value.

the blanket statement of whether RAID is useful or not is always wrong, no matter which side of the opinion it falls on.

the fact is, for small amounts of data it isn't, and for large amounts of data it is.

so define small and large?

i used to work for a legal publisher who sold access to case law online. that's hundreds of thousands of gigs back when the most cost effective SCSI drive size was 9 gigs. picture a hundred university law libraries being ripped up and fed into a scanner by a staff of ~100 people every day, and it never ends, hundreds of new pages come in that add to that total, also every day. obviously it was useful for us there, it was the only feasible means of preventing service failure due to hardware failure. you can't back it all up every day, the backup would take more hours to complete than there are late night hours for the backup, you'd never get one finished, it had to be real time.

however, i use an HTPC at home and use a media server for online netflix playback, music/movie storage, etc. i have a ton of HDDVDs due to buying a dual format player so that i could use both formats before bluray won that format war, so the only feasible way for me to ensure i get continued use from my HDDVDs is to store them on my media server and play them back digitally rather than from the physical disks, i can't get standalone players for those disks anymore, so when my current player dies i have to have another means of playing them.

those HDDVDs are also a "large" amount of data. it's less than 2000 gigs, but it's still more than i can put on a single drive in my small HTPC, so for that RAID is also a viable option. it's small compared to the thousands of gigs we stored at my former employer's business, but it's large for home use.

that's the bottom line with whether RAID is useful or not, is it a "large" amount of data. large being completely relative and dependent on the total capacity of the PCs at the location in question, and the feasibility of other backup options.

there's also the question of user friendliness. i set up the network in my dad's sign shop, for instance. it's all family members working there, none of which have any experience with computer networks. and they like to tear up computers. it's an old building so the power is flaky, they lose power supplies constantly. they don't believe in good practices on the internet either, they typically buy 300 dollar dell machines, and when all of the stupid crap they download while waiting on a batch of signs to print viruses-up their machine to the point that it isn't usable anymore, they just pitch it and go buy another 300 dollar PC. considering that scenario, a RAID server in the back room that handles the data they actually need is the only viable solution. even if i were to set up a backup system on every PC, they toss the PCs out every 6 months, so new ones wouldn't have the backup system in place from the old one, whatever it was. with a RAID box that has both the parity, the hot spare, and an automated remote backup via FTP, i can move the responsibility to them. "if you want to keep it, you had better put it on the server, otherwise you're on your own, your PC is YOUR problem, not mine". if not for that they'd be calling me every time one of the 6 or 7 PCs got a virus. which, considering the users, is probably about every other day.

on the other hand, for grandma's pictures and emails, not really useful, i agree. small amounts of data could be effectively backed up on USB flash keys (which never go bad as long as you don't approach the write limit of the media).

small or large, no or yes, it's not a cut and dried endorsement or condemnation of RAID.

[Matt Meiser]

Well, I don't think I'd recommend Qnap. Mine showed up yesterday without the CD which you have to have to load the firmware to the drive after you install it. I went to their web site and the downloads were all broken--got a permissions error when I clicked any of them. So I called and the guy I spoke to said he had to have someone in Taiwan fix it. He couldn't mail it to me, couldn't put it somewhere I could FTP it, and couldn't use a file transfer site--I just had to wait. Taiwan did fix it overnight. Except that their download server is apparently on a dailup line in Taiwan using one of those old acoustic modems because its transferring a 91.6MB file at 36.8 BYTES/sec. Yes, I said bytes. Only 30 days and 4 hours until I have a usable NAS.

Anticipating that they wouldn't get the downloads fixed, I ordered a Synology from Amazon last night and expect it today and just requested a return label for the Qnap. What a shame.

Oooh...the speed just jumped to 298 bytes/sec. Only 6 days! :rolleyes:

[Bryan Morgan]

Well, I don't think I'd recommend Qnap. Mine showed up yesterday without the CD which you have to have to load the firmware to the drive after you install it. I went to their web site and the downloads were all broken--got a permissions error when I clicked any of them. So I called and the guy I spoke to said he had to have someone in Taiwan fix it. He couldn't mail it to me, couldn't put it somewhere I could FTP it, and couldn't use a file transfer site--I just had to wait. Taiwan did fix it overnight. Except that their download server is apparently on a dailup line in Taiwan using one of those old acoustic modems because its transferring a 91.6MB file at 36.8 BYTES/sec. Yes, I said bytes. Only 30 days and 4 hours until I have a usable NAS.

Anticipating that they wouldn't get the downloads fixed, I ordered a Synology from Amazon last night and expect it today and just requested a return label for the Qnap. What a shame.

Oooh...the speed just jumped to 298 bytes/sec. Only 6 days! :rolleyes:


:D I didn't want to say anything about Qnap but thats the general feeling I got from them so I've always avoided them.

[Matt Meiser]

Well, I've had the Synology since October 22. I ended up plugging a USB drive I already had into it for my work backups which has also worked quite well. Its been running continually since October 27--when I shut it down to plug it into a UPS. It does exactly what I want--just sits there and works.

[Prashun Patel]

I've had the ReadyNas for a couple months now. It's ok. Managing permissions on a Windows domain has been a little tricky for me - more than the Buffalo Terastation I used to have.

[Jerome Stanek]

I'm running ximeta It shows up as a hard drive just like a cd or slave drive.