[SOLVED] Good 6TB HDDs in RAID1 for Synology R814

[moegerbyte]

Hi people!

I'm outfitting a NAS rack for reliable storage of backups of audio data for my company and I'm looking for experience with specific HDD models.

Synology R814
6TB in RAID1 HDD
SATA

I'm looking for a good value product with 3-5 years of guarantee within the budget of ~ 500€ total.

The NAS is in an enclosed 19" rack with ventilation, so I have margins on heat and noise. I dug up the Toshiba N300 6TB NAS 3.5” HDD HDWN160UZSVA and think it looks quite good, but I have no experience with HDDs in RAID1.

So if you have any thoughts, I'd appreciate your help and advice! Thanks!
m

 

[RealBeast]

Hi people!

I'm outfitting a NAS rack for reliable storage of backups of audio data for my company and I'm looking for experience with specific HDD models.

Synology R814
6TB in RAID1 HDD
SATA

I'm looking for a good value product with 3-5 years of guarantee within the budget of ~ 500€ total.

The NAS is in an enclosed 19" rack with ventilation, so I have margins on heat and noise. I dug up the Toshiba N300 6TB NAS 3.5” HDD HDWN160UZSVA and think it looks quite good, but I have no experience with HDDs in RAID1.

So if you have any thoughts, I'd appreciate your help and advice! Thanks!
m

Yes, those look fine. Backblaze stats on Toshiba drives are quite good, although that specific drive is not one that they used.

While all of the modern drives do well, they generally tend to last if they make it past the first 30-90 days (where poor shipping can damage them). And all the drive statistics in the world only help and cannot tell you what a specific drive will do. I rarely have modern drives fail though.

Of course, even with RAID1 you will want another backup that is not too close to your primary backup in the event of whatever is a problem in your area (flooding, tornadoes, earthquake, fires, etc.)

 

[DSzymborski]

RAID is not a backup solution.

RAID is for volume availability, not data availability. If you have a server and require access to time-critical data at every second, then you use RAID. In addition to a backup solution. Because RAID is not a backup solution.

 

[moegerbyte]

Yes, those look fine. Backblaze stats on Toshiba drives are quite good, although that specific drive is not one that they used.

Thanks. I'm looking up backblaze and specific models that are compatible with the Synology rack.

RAID is not a backup solution.

RAID is for volume availability, not data availability. If you have a server and require access to time-critical data at every second, then you use RAID. In addition to a backup solution. Because RAID is not a backup solution.

Hm, maybe I'm doing this wrong. We were thinking to use the NAS as a means to transfer data too (between building wings and offices), but mainly wanted to have a server volume to archive finished projects redundantly.

We have a couple of local machines pushing around a lot of large audio files while the projects are ongoing. At some point they should be archived for later use.

I understand there should be at least a third copy of the archived data in a cloud for the data to be "backed up" properly, but what's the best strategy for developing such a system? If there is a good read out there I'd appreciate a link.

Thanks!

 

[RealBeast]

RAID is indeed meant to keep your data available to work on by protecting you from drive loss and still allowing you to carry on operations until dead drives are replaced and the array rebuilt. It should not be considered the way to protect the data itself, just to keep it available to use.

If the finished work is valuable a cloud backup would be a good plan. There are many options but take a look HERE for a lot of useful information on the hows and whys of it all.

For my video work (and some machine backup images) I have two distinct large RAID 6 arrays (one offline but backed up to frequently) so that my data is always available. It is also stored with a cloud solution for protection against total loss.

 

[ss202sl]

RAID is not a backup solution.

RAID is for volume availability, not data availability. If you have a server and require access to time-critical data at every second, then you use RAID. In addition to a backup solution. Because RAID is not a backup solution.

He said this is for the storage of the backups. It isn't the actual data so he isn't depending on the raid as a backup.

 

[RealBeast]

He said this is for the storage of the backups. It isn't the actual data so he isn't depending on the raid as a backup.

I find that it is often useful to mention all aspects of a course of action that an OP intends, as it often helps them really form their need if they don't have a lot of experience in some particular area. It's true in storage and networking for sure. So we tend to ask a lot of questions and cover topics broadly unless the question is highly specific.