NAS for RAID5: DS413 or TS-421?

[riahc3]

Hello :)

 

Im looking for a 4 disk NAS server. Ive looked at two models: Synology DiskStation DS413 (419 ?) and QNAP TS-421 (479 ?)

 

Ill use it as "My Documents, Deskop, etc" drive (My user will mount the network drive and get its My Documents, Desktop, etc folder from there).

 

What are your recommendations?

 

Thank you

 

 

 

[tsupersonic]

Synology. I have a Synology DS213 (2 bay), and it is awesome for storing documents, backups, streaming to my 360. Great community support, and software is extremely easy to use (although QNAP is decent too)

[philcruicks]

Both are really decent, my friend has a Q-Nap and likes it, I almost got a Synology DS413j (before getting an HP Microserver for its added functionality and better price)

 

Either is a great choice, personally I'd go for the Synology, as its just for Docs storage etc... you probably don't need the extra CPU power in the Qnap or the dual Nic's etc.. which is where the price difference is.

[riahc3]

Both are really decent, my friend has a Q-Nap and likes it, I almost got a Synology DS413j (before getting an HP Microserver for its added functionality and better price)

 

Either is a great choice, personally I'd go for the Synology, as its just for Docs storage etc... you probably don't need the extra CPU power in the Qnap or the dual Nic's etc.. which is where the price difference is.

Well for the few extra bucks (60?) is the extra CPU power and dual NICs worth it?

 

Now that you mention it, at my workplace we have a Q-NAP as well (admind by me) and for the most part, Im pretty happy with it. I just made a VPN server with it as well and it works pretty good :)

 

Im happy with a Q-NAP at my office but Ive heard a lot of good things about Synology.

 

Also, viewing other models, should I go with ARM or x86?

[philcruicks]

Well for the few extra bucks (60?) is the extra CPU power and dual NICs worth it?

 

Now that you mention it, at my workplace we have a Q-NAP as well (admind by me) and for the most part, Im pretty happy with it. I just made a VPN server with it as well and it works pretty good :)

 

Im happy with a Q-NAP at my office but Ive heard a lot of good things about Synology.

 

Also, viewing other models, should I go with ARM or x86?

Well if you've got the budget to spend then go for it, extra power will probably be useful in the long run.

x86 is one of the other reasons I didn't get either NAS and got the server, cause I can just install whatever programs or services I want...not limited by what can run on ARM in a NAS's proprietary OS.

[riahc3]

Well if you've got the budget to spend then go for it, extra power will probably be useful in the long run.

x86 is one of the other reasons I didn;t get either NAS and got the server cause I can just install whatever programs or services I want...not limited by what can run on ARM in a NAS's proprietary OS.

Well the server in your sig, is at 192,40 ?....but at that price I imagine it is a 2bay and I at least need a 4bay for my RAID5.

[sagum]

Not sure about qnap devices, but the DiskStation DS413 has iscsi support, so you could simply add a drive to your PC rather then befuggling around with network shares.

[riahc3]

Not sure about qnap devices, but the DiskStation DS413 has iscsi support, so you could simply add a drive to your PC rather then befuggling around with network shares.

QNAP also has iSCSI. Tried to do it here at work but could not get it to work. Ill problably make it iSCSI on my home though since Ive heard the performance is worth it.

[philcruicks]

Well the server in your sig, is at 192,40 ?....but at that price I imagine it is a 2bay and I at least need a 4bay for my RAID5.

No its a 4bay, they're just really cheap, just mine is the slightly slower model at 1.6GHz rather than 2.2GHz can't find the specs for mine now. (they're going end of life cause the Gen8 version is out.

http://www8.hp.com/uk/en/products/proliant-servers/product-detail.html?oid=4248009#!tab=features

[riahc3]

No its a 4bay, they're just really cheap, just mine is the slightly slower model at 1.6GHz rather than 2.2GHz can't find the specs for mine now. (they're going end of life cause the Gen8 version is out.

http://www8.hp.com/uk/en/products/proliant-servers/product-detail.html?oid=4248009#!tab=features

Ah but this out of the box only supports RAID0, RAID1...........to support RAID5, I would have to buy a expansion card (which I have, RocketRAID 640) which pretty much leaves me where I am now.....

 

The Synology DiskStation DS413 looks intresting to me and AFAIK doesnt really have any different in features with the QNAP TS-421 (only better CPU).

 

BTW, Ive seen these two options but if there are any other 4 bay RAID5 NASs out there, please say so :) Im not too happy about a HP ProLiant N40L Microserver/FreeNAS combo as I simply want something easy to setup but Im not sure either if its actually worth the price difference....

[TPreston]

Hello :)

 

Im looking for a 4 disk NAS server. Ive looked at two models: Synology DiskStation DS413 (419 ?) and QNAP TS-421 (479 ?)

 

Ill use it as "My Documents, Deskop, etc" drive (My user will mount the network drive and get its My Documents, Desktop, etc folder from there).

 

What are your recommendations?

 

Thank you

For that price you could get a 12 bay SAS expander like the the msa60 and have money to spare for a 16 port SAS card like the p800.

EOL enterprise gear = more for less

[philcruicks]

Ah but this out of the box only supports RAID0, RAID1...........to support RAID5, I would have to buy a expansion card (which I have, RocketRAID 640) which pretty much leaves me where I am now.....

 

The Synology DiskStation DS413 looks intresting to me and AFAIK doesnt really have any different in features with the QNAP TS-421 (only better CPU).

 

BTW, Ive seen these two options but if there are any other 4 bay RAID5 NASs out there, please say so :) Im not too happy about a HP ProLiant N40L Microserver/FreeNAS combo as I simply want something easy to setup but Im not sure either if its actually worth the price difference....

I have Windows Server 2012 so that has Storage Spaces which is parity. I don't use the hardware RAID.

[riahc3]

For that price you could get a 12 bay SAS expander like the the msa60 and have money to spare for a 16 port SAS card like the p800.

EOL enterprise gear = more for less

 

Im not too sure what you mean, Im sorry...

 

I looked up HP MSA60 and got this:

 

http://www.senetic.es/product/418408-B21?gclid=CPmz14qQ9bkCFQ_LtAoddDwAfQ

 

I imagine that at 2880.41 ? you mean something else or I misunderstood you

[TPreston]

Im not too sure what you mean, Im sorry...

 

I looked up HP MSA60 and got this:

 

http://www.senetic.es/product/418408-B21?gclid=CPmz14qQ9bkCFQ_LtAoddDwAfQ

 

I imagine that at 2880.41 ? you mean something else or I misunderstood you

http://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-Storageworks-MSA60-418408-B21-RAILS-12-x-HDD-TRAYS-w-SCREWS-/111172799776?pt=US_NAS_Disk_Arrays&hash=item19e26a4d20

http://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-SMART-ARRAY-P800-16-PORT-SAS-SATA-RAID-Controller-512MB-w-Battery-501575-001-/131007544433?pt=US_Server_Disk_Controllers_RAID_Cards&hash=item1e80a87c71

Of course these devices will use more power and make more noise than consumer gear but good luck finding a 12 bay nas for under ?2000.

[riahc3]

http://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-Storageworks-MSA60-418408-B21-RAILS-12-x-HDD-TRAYS-w-SCREWS-/111172799776?pt=US_NAS_Disk_Arrays&hash=item19e26a4d20

http://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-SMART-ARRAY-P800-16-PORT-SAS-SATA-RAID-Controller-512MB-w-Battery-501575-001-/131007544433?pt=US_Server_Disk_Controllers_RAID_Cards&hash=item1e80a87c71

Of course these devices will use more power and make more noise than consumer gear but good luck finding a 12 bay nas for under ?2000.

 

470 ? (used) and the P800 is not avaliable for me....

 

Also, Im not sure I have room for this....seems kinda big to put on the floor.

 

Do I have to install a OS for this?

 

Sorry, Im kinda lost on these rack things for home.

 

Im not too intrested in noise; This will go in my room and it will be on all day/night.

[TPreston]

Then that rules out the enterprise route because these things are noisy and need to be put in a garage.

[patseguin Global Moderator]

I think Synology makes a great product and they have terrific support.

[riahc3]

Then that rules out the enterprise route because these things are noisy and need to be put in a garage.

 

Thank you for the suggestion though :)

 

Ill problably get the Synology DiskStation DS413 since you guys are talking all Synology and no QNAP. Might revist this thread though because Im calculating my expenses currently and Im not sure this would be a good time economically to aquire this....

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

i have the DS409, and it's been fantastic. The 413 is simply the newer version. i'd highly recommend it.

[+BudMan MVC]

Why exactly do you need raid 5? Sounds like a home or soho type setup. Not sure in such a scenario the added cost of raid 5 makes much sense?

Raid 5 is a way to mitigate downtime in a hardware failure. It is not a replacement for backup, etc.

How much storage do you require? Why would a raid 1 not work if what your after is hardware failure security.

I want to stress that raid 1, or 5 or even 10 or 6 is not a replacement of actual backup of your critical files. These methods only allow for little or no downtime if you have a disk failure.

In a home or soho/smb type setup whre your looking for most bang for the buck - alternative methods are normally more cost effective if you ask me.

Are all the files going to be stored here required to be online 99.999% You might be better of just using 1 disk or multiple disks in a pool and having a good backup process. In case of failure of hardware, your down for the length of time to replace the hardware and restore from backup.

Depending on space required maybe raid 1 gives you hardware redundancy, or other methods of raid allow you to have a pool with 1 disk being your parity disk and allows for more flexibility in growth of space. Or a simple pool of your disks while selecting files or directories that you want copied to multiple disks in your pool.

Things have really changed and with the size of disks, the types of storage, raid 5 is just not a go to method it use to be 10 years ago ;)

[riahc3]

Why exactly do you need raid 5? Sounds like a home or soho type setup. Not sure in such a scenario the added cost of raid 5 makes much sense?

Raid 5 is a way to mitigate downtime in a hardware failure. It is not a replacement for backup, etc.

How much storage do you require? Why would a raid 1 not work if what your after is hardware failure security.

I want to stress that raid 1, or 5 or even 10 or 6 is not a replacement of actual backup of your critical files. These methods only allow for little or no downtime if you have a disk failure.

In a home or soho/smb type setup whre your looking for most bang for the buck - alternative methods are normally more cost effective if you ask me.

Are all the files going to be stored here required to be online 99.999% You might be better of just using 1 disk or multiple disks in a pool and having a good backup process. In case of failure of hardware, your down for the length of time to replace the hardware and restore from backup.

Depending on space required maybe raid 1 gives you hardware redundancy, or other methods of raid allow you to have a pool with 1 disk being your parity disk and allows for more flexibility in growth of space. Or a simple pool of your disks while selecting files or directories that you want copied to multiple disks in your pool.

Things have really changed and with the size of disks, the types of storage, raid 5 is just not a go to method it use to be 10 years ago ;)

 

Budman,

 

I was hoping someone wasnt going to get into this....

 

RAID5 has saved me 3 times. Just that, makes me not want to leave RAID5 ever again.

 

The storage size Im currently working with is 3TB x 4 in a RAID5.

[goatsniffer]

riahc3, on 01 Oct 2013 - 12:36, said:

Budman,

 

I was hoping someone wasnt going to get into this....

 

RAID5 has saved me 3 times. Just that, makes me not want to leave RAID5 ever again.

 

The storage size Im currently working with is 3TB x 4 in a RAID5.

 

While I do have 2 RAID5 arrays for my home office, I have to agree with Budman when it comes to best practices. The larger the drives and the arrays get, the less reliable RAID5 becomes. There are so many examples out there of second drive failures on rebuild, and research showing the problems with large drive/array RAID5.

 

For mission-critical data, you can't get greedy for storage capacity. RAID10 is a much better solution, and actually gives better performance in most cases. Above all, you still need to back up!

 

For four drives or more, RAID10 offers superior performance and redundancy.

[+BudMan MVC]

"RAID5 has saved me 3 times. Just that, makes me not want to leave RAID5 ever again."

Then feel free to stick with it - just pointing out that is not the end all solution to everything. It has a specific place and use - in home setup I don't think its worth the cost.

So you have 9TB of space in your setup. Do you really need 9TB? How are you backing up this 9TB of stuff?

You could use 3TBx3 in a pool and duplicate the critical files/folders to 2 or 3 of those disks. Are all 9TB actually critical? Or is it some subset of that space?

Its great that raid 5 has saved your need to restore from backup - but does not mean that you can expect to run without a backup going forward, what about that 4th time when 2 disks crash, or the control fails and corrupts your array. Or the storage (NAS) or Server gets stolen or someone spills a wobbly pop on it?

But if you have the budget and that's how you want to spend your money.. More power to you.. There are many ways to skin the cat and setup a raid 5 of 4 disk.

Both of those ts-421 and ds413 seem to support raid5 along with other options. Seem to fall in the same ballpark on price $500 so either one should work.

[riahc3]

"RAID5 has saved me 3 times. Just that, makes me not want to leave RAID5 ever again."

Then feel free to stick with it - just pointing out that is not the end all solution to everything. It has a specific place and use - in home setup I don't think its worth the cost.

So you have 9TB of space in your setup. Do you really need 9TB? How are you backing up this 9TB of stuff?

You could use 3TBx3 in a pool and duplicate the critical files/folders to 2 or 3 of those disks. Are all 9TB actually critical? Or is it some subset of that space?

Its great that raid 5 has saved your need to restore from backup - but does not mean that you can expect to run without a backup going forward, what about that 4th time when 2 disks crash, or the control fails and corrupts your array. Or the storage (NAS) or Server gets stolen or someone spills a wobbly pop on it?

But if you have the budget and that's how you want to spend your money.. More power to you.. There are many ways to skin the cat and setup a raid 5 of 4 disk.

Both of those ts-421 and ds413 seem to support raid5 along with other options. Seem to fall in the same ballpark on price $500 so either one should work.

 

Budman,

 

9TB is currently "future proof". The data on the RAID5 is not all critical and critical data is (mostly) backed up. With the NAS, I hope to manage it better.

 

There are a lot of example where something can happen (either to my current RAID5 or the NAS box). For example, where I work, we have mandatory insurance for all workers. One of the points in the contract actually says "This insurance does not cover extraterrestrial or similar unknown related working accidents". At the end of the day, there can be a small percentage that can be destructful.

I currently backup "important stuff" to a seperate nonrelated hard drive. With the NAS, I hope to take that also to a cloud backup as it is integrated. I know I can do it now as well now but its pretty manual labor.

That being said, we are getting way off topic; Im just looking for a NAS, thats it.

Thank you for the suggestions and opinions.

[RottGutt]

Synology all the way. Go to both their web sites and do the "test drive" of their operating systems. Synology's is head-and-shoulders above all the competition, and it will do all the things you want plus so much more.

 

Tim