Synology DS412+ And Thecus N4800: Two NAS Devices With Atom D2700

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

SirGCal

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2010
310
0
18,780
0
[citation][nom]milktea[/nom]I hope everything is fine with you SirGCal (with regards to your medical issue).[/citation]

Honestly, we're still in the hospital. I'm typing this up on the Hospital's WiFi. But you sit here so long with nothing but really bad TV every day, I'm excited to be able to work honestly.

[citation][nom]milktea[/nom]And I didn't mean to tick you off in anyway. Just trying to open up a discussion and understand each other's POV from the limited words. But I believe our discussion have gone way out to who knows where.As you can tell I'm not so much of a DIYer. I'll do some DIY, but I rather buy a solution.At any rate, you mentioned that you 'would never even suggest a NAS' to the average home user? I failed to see your point there. I mean even printers are going WiFi. Why can't external storage becomes network access? And why would Buffalo, Seagate, Dlink, IoMega, etc... build single&dual HDD network attached storage?[/citation]

Obviously they can sell them or they wouldn't build them. But also, it's how they sell them and why that is what they're making their money on.

I'll break it down as quickly as I can. People hear more industry speak sneak out into the public world and in the computer/IT industry, this is more then probably anywhere else. NAS is a really broad and simple term. But honestly, until very recently, they were almost always some form of server farm drive systems of MAN?Y drives, single to raid, but all in one box accessed by other systems directly. The point was basically maintenance. IF the bulk of your hard drives are in one spot, it's just easier to go to when there's a problem vs tracking down which of thousands of servers it might be in.

Over the years they've gotten smaller and there are actually reasons for a home user to get some, even single (2-drive) units. But as I said before, not for the example you listed. IF you even had a cellphone that would pull from it at least, that would be slightly more useful. But honestly, for one computer, it's just a waste to spend any money on a NAS box. With just one computer, just put two drives in your computer and mirror them and you have truly simple raid solutions that will work perfectly. And if you still wanted to share stuff with a few other devices at home, just share the folder. Very simple and really easy to do and again, no one's special 'firmware' to run everything properly. Just (ANY) working OS. The home NAS is about convenience and nothing more. But it does this with dependence on minimalistic hardware/software. The nicer boxes like ones in this review, use actual hardware combinations but still often make their own ROM based software which all too often tends to be really stripped down and buggy and hard to use even, from an administrator side. Obviously they get better over time but they are still quite pricy, hence the whole point of my original post to begin with. The two-drive NASs like you're referring to do it with much less hardware. No more then an interface chip with minimal capabilities and software. If you had the family music collection on it and a house full of kids always accessing it, then it might make more sense. But honestly more often then not, they are more hastle then they are worth. I personally wouldn't even look toward a NAS for myself or any of my family members or kids, unless they needed like a 4+ drive setup (RAID 5/5+spare). OR, possibly if they have all laptops and no desktops. That changes the game a bit too. But even then, a plug-in USB setup is still more reliable and faster unless you're going to use it for off-line time active backups from all over the house.

[citation][nom]milktea[/nom] I doubt any businesses would buy these single/dual HDD NAS. So they must be marketed towards home users, isn't that correct? That means there has to be some advantages to bring these tiny NAS to home users.Are you saying that these manufacturers made a wrong marketing decisions?Oh, and sorry, I didn't mean NAS+SAN. What I meant was NAS+DAS, direct attached.And yes, I know WiFi connection is horrible. That's why I'm waiting for Patriot to put a GbEthernet port on their Gaunlet Node. But even Ethernet cannot match the speed the the USB3/eSata (DAS). That is why I'm hoping for a NAS+DAS combo. The best of both worlds in one tiny package.[/citation]

Actually, no. To the speed question. Yes USB3 is faster then even wired network, theoretically. But it's only as fast as the slowest part which in this case is the hard drive (actually the RAID controller in this case will slow it down a tiny bit more too for mirroring, at least writes). Neither one is even going to come CLOSE. The drive could easily saturate WiFi, but no way wired. Not without a very fast array. But then again, if speed is that important, and it's too much to fit into the server, then it's a SAN we're looking at or at least a high-drive count NAS array just to get the drive speeds up. But to get 4G+ type drive access speeds, that's SAN only territory to get arrays big enough to do it (or special SSD arrays for in-box projects, but they will generally be rather low overall total sizes considering the drive counts to hit that level. There are also a few specialty pieces, again, relatively small and with very large pricetags). I don't even know of any add-on external USB/eSata boxes that can actually produce that type of speed from drives they'll hold to be honest. They might exist if some of the bigger ones can reliably handle SSD drives. On that one I honestly don't know if they exist or not. There just isn't really a need out there though to be truthful. Even myself as an over-insanely-extreme gamer, hard core home servers, etc. I'd have no use for something with that throughput. That's pretty much huge business level stuff.

And as I said before, there is a market for the 2 drive home systems, but a lot of people I think use them when they have no need to just because they heard of a NAS and they have to have one. IF I had a buck for every time I've been asked which one to buy just from people at work alone, I could buy one hell of a nice car. My first question always is 'why do you need a NAS' and just about every time I give them a better solution for what they were trying to do. Sometimes, it would be the right choice. But in reality, especially with the cheaper units, they are likely giving themselves more headaches vs doing themselves favors. Some of em work fine but almost always, you can get the same thing in an external USB format enclosure cheaper anyhow just attached to a PC. But still, stick two drives into your working desktop and build a simple mirrored setup is your cheapest option. And with that being the only thing you have to access it, when it's off, who cares about the array! A lot of people just don't realize they can do that easily with their boxes. Or they don't WANT to, that's a different reason. Then external boxes would be more preferred but still often more desirable then a whole separate NAS.

As with anything, it's all about the details. But even without a 'skillset' for DIY, don't be afraid of at least buiing two capable drives and an external case capable of doing it and sticking it on your PC. Honestly, if you just make sure the enclosure will either do drive mirroring or support RAID 1 and you don't get the few WD Green drives that crap out in RAID (though RAID 1 usually is never the issue there), it would be pretty hard to go wrong. And almost any of those driveless cases, you'll need to do the drive homework anyhow. And hey, maybe the NASs have come down. I haven't looked in a bit. But even still, it's another point of failure/trouble that just, especially for your example, just isn't necessary.

I've given you a lot of data. Some of it very complicated I know, but I tried to bring this down to laymen as much as possible. Just remember one simple thing; don't add a point of failure that you don't have a benefit from. Going NAS is a point of failure (honestly, even for a printer. it's just 'wireless' so it's convenient. And for myself with half a dozen computers and multiple laptops that use the printer, sure it makes perfect sense too. But in your case, it MIGHT make a tiny bit of sense if you want your printer in another room or something but other then that, it would just be easier and simpler basically to run a USB cable from the printer to the computer.

I know you've heard this before (at least I'd put $ on that you have) but there's an old saying that just always seems to apply nearly everywhere. KISS = Keep It Simple Stupid. Every time I realize I'm trying to over-think a problem, that comes to mind. Step back and re-evaluate. Is there a simpler, easier and more sensible way to do it? Probably every 2 in 3 times there is and I went right by it. But in this case, why wait for it. If you have the need for backup/storage/mirroring setup now, do it. Don't wait for someone to make something you really don't need just to get something more complicated and expensive then what you need to do what you want.
 

milktea

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2009
599
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]SirGCal[/nom]I know you've heard this before (at least I'd put $ on that you have) but there's an old saying that just always seems to apply nearly everywhere. KISS = Keep It Simple Stupid. ...[/citation]
Yes, I've heard of that term first time from the Canon DSLR camera. I believe in Asia, Canon market their entry level DSLR as KISS, but in the U.S. it is called the Rebel. Very nice DSLR in the early days, but many others have caught up.

Thank you for all your inputs. I couldn't denied what you've said. But there's a lot of details to considered, along with lots of personal preferences.

With regards to the NAS targeted for home users... I think if manufactures would educate users about fault tolerant storage, they might open up a very profitable market. I mean we rely so much on data these days, everything is going 'paperless' such as bank statements, mortgage payments, stocks, music/video collections, etc...
So not only businesses need fault tolerant storage, but I think home users are starting to moving into this category, everything is going digital. There's also the options for Smartphones and Tablet that could access the NAS shares.
And not many home users (especially the ones who knows nothing about NAS), could build their own NAS. They would have to rely on manufactures to provide a one stop solution. I know there's the Cloud backup. But I don't know anyone who'd trust the cloud for their private stuffs.
What do you think of the future for these home NAS? Or you still think a simple USB external drive is a better choice for users who need to share contents between devices at home?

If someone (knows almost nothing about computer) comes ask you how to protect their music/video collections, but at the same time need a simple way to share it. What would you recommend?


BTW, Good luck with your medical issues.
 

SirGCal

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2010
310
0
18,780
0
[citation][nom]milktea[/nom]Yes, I've heard of that term first time from the Canon DSLR camera. I believe in Asia, Canon market their entry level DSLR as KISS, but in the U.S. it is called the Rebel. Very nice DSLR in the early days, but many others have caught up.[/citation]

The phrase is MUCH older that that. I'm hitting 40 and my grandfather is the one who told it to me. I think the time it was first made public news was in the 1940's. But it is a principal that stands up better then others over time.

[citation][nom]milktea[/nom]Thank you for all your inputs. I couldn't denied what you've said. But there's a lot of details to considered, along with lots of personal preferences.With regards to the NAS targeted for home users... I think if manufactures would educate users about fault tolerant storage, they might open up a very profitable market.[/citation]

Wouldn't that be nice, but then they couldn't sell their other overpriced options that people don't need. That's the catch, get the public to buy what you're making. When honestly, it should be make what the public needs. Sometimes I feel the latter is left wanting.

[citation][nom]milktea[/nom]I mean we rely so much on data these days, everything is going 'paperless' such as bank statements, mortgage payments, stocks, music/video collections, etc...So not only businesses need fault tolerant storage, but I think home users are starting to moving into this category, everything is going digital. There's also the options for Smartphones and Tablet that could access the NAS shares.And not many home users (especially the ones who knows nothing about NAS), could build their own NAS. They would have to rely on manufactures to provide a one stop solution. I know there's the Cloud backup. But I don't know anyone who'd trust the cloud for their private stuffs.What do you think of the future for these home NAS?[/citation]

Honestly, the Cloud is another 'buzzword' that truly pisses me off. It's the internet, mainframe, server farms, etc. They've been around for a very long time but someone hangs a catchy name on it and 'Ohhhhhh... The Cloud!' (like the alien toys did in Toy Story for the Claw)

But, there IS a place for that and some darn good services too. Size again becomes the practicality problem. Using online backup services that are trustworthy are an excellent way to backup your personal stuffs. Receipts, important files you can not lose, etc. Just be sure you read the privacy policies of any you're considering. No NAS, SAN, Etc. can compete with the security of off-site storage. But you'd never keep a huge music collection or movie collection up there unfortunately. Simply, even most broadband connections would take years to do large backups of that scale. I do store my pictures that way, but not my music/movies, even home movies. It would just be too expensive even if you did have awesome throughput. Maybe soon though that'll also be fixed. That IS the best solution of all strangely enough. They store the files in large server farms, very secure, and mirrored in multiple locations in most cases. They'd basically have to have all of their buildings destroyed for lack of a better example, to lose your data. But that's also why it costs. The cheaper options out there may or may not be as reliable. Do your research before buying into one. But the other big advantage is any device can get to your files with just your security credentials.

And THAT said, if, like me, you need to share with multiple devices at the same time, also need relatively fast access, (streaming video to multiple sources), then a NAS is about your only option to get the speed you need (more then any single/double drive could do). But I also have plenty of shared drives on separate boxes for different purposes that work just as well for the occasional access from any device. Including simple RAID 1 shared drives.

[citation][nom]milktea[/nom]Or you still think a simple USB external drive is a better choice for users who need to share contents between devices at home?[/citation]

Honestly, if you want it in an external separate box, this is still an extremely good option with universal connection methods (USB). And generally just cheaper. And external drives can be shared also just like internals. So it can work both ways as a shared network drive on one box and just a plug in drive to others.

[citation][nom]milktea[/nom]If someone (knows almost nothing about computer) comes ask you how to protect their music/video collections, but at the same time need a simple way to share it. What would you recommend?BTW, Good luck with your medical issues.[/citation]

If it'll fit on one drive, a simple RAID 1 array, in any form would work. In an existing computer would be the cheapest, in an external USB/eSATA drive would be next. I personally wouldn't move up to NAS until you need an external method of high-speed storage of more then just 2 drives. And honestly, they make some big external USB capable drive units still too. If all of your systems read the same file types (NTFS), then that would be your bet. The point of the NAS also, is that the file system is irreverent again. So any system can access it no matter what it reads natively. But again, that brings us right back to the beginning all over again.

And we've been playing musical hospital rooms. Getting very annoyed with them actually.
 

jonf805

Distinguished
Jul 30, 2010
3
0
18,510
0

If anyone wants to build their own Synology diskstation, check out XPEnology. You can pourchase an ideal rackable raid 4 disk server on ebay for around $150, load synoboot onto a (Write protect capable) flash drive and have a synology NAS up an running in a matter of minutes.

Full synology open source fork (XPEnology). No features removed. All the features of Synology NAS)
http://xpenology.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=41


Xpenology
http://xpenology.com/forum/

This scenario would save you over $1000 building your own with better hardware to boot. They also have virtualbox releases if you want to try it before purchasing hardware.

2 dual core opteron (4 or 6 core capable socket 1207f), 16GB ram, 400gb sata. $170
http://www.ebay.com/itm/2U-RAID-Server-Rackable-2x-AMD-Opteron-2214-Dual-Core-NM46X-16GB-400GB-SATA-Good-/140913939440?ssPageName=ADME:B:FSEL:US:1123




 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY