Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 Any recommendation for NAS with cloud services

views
     
xxboxx
post May 7 2020, 06:56 PM

The mind is for having ideas, not holding them
*******
Senior Member
5,261 posts

Joined: Oct 2004
From: J@Y B33


QUOTE(jaycee1 @ May 7 2020, 09:03 AM)
Thanks to all for the responses.

Just wondering what filesystem are these running?

On my previous Dllink DNS 323, it ran a simple exFAT so when the unit died, I could retrieve all the data from the drives easily. It was a matter of running the exFAT utility and copying all the files out.

Im assuming if you don't run any encryption on it.

So far looks like users like Synology, but from my own research so far, Asustor seems to have the best specs for the money... At least on paper.
So do I go with the cheaper box, and spend more on better drives like the Seagate ironwolf drives or better box with cheaper Seagate barracudas.
*
Asustor got better hardware than Synology for same price. Synology got more polished software. Some Synology model got M.2 slots for cache does seem like better option for plenty users that will read/write a lot small files, unless you want to use SSD instead of HDD. Both brands support BTRFS filesystem with snapshot, this will help against bit-rot and roll back to previously saved file version.

You don't want to go for Barracuda with NAS, it's not designed for usage 24/7 on NAS and with recent exposure that some Barracuda drive using SMR the more reason to avoid it.

I'm using Asustor, so far it is stable and connection speed is fast. Never use Synology so I don't know the pros and cons between these 2 brands.
xxboxx
post May 8 2020, 06:16 PM

The mind is for having ideas, not holding them
*******
Senior Member
5,261 posts

Joined: Oct 2004
From: J@Y B33


QUOTE(jaycee1 @ May 8 2020, 09:19 AM)
Looks like the case. Getting the IronWolf drives seems logical.

If my budget was healthier, I would definitely be looking at mid to higher range Synology 4 bay (RAID5+hot spare) with M.2 cache. Would really speed things up and with better redundancy. Perhaps a later upgrade. Right now most of my performance is limited to my digi upstream anyway. There is only 3 office staff that would be using the fileserver (accounts, admin, and operation assistant) so it would be light load. 5 more sales staff that will only log in to update reports or download updated references infrequently. Like I said, I don't expect to see more than 5 concurrent users...hardly enterprise level requirements.

Back then, as syadmin my annual IT budget is 100k +. Own SME is very different, have to really pinch pennies ..hahahahaha
*
I would suggest better to get 4 bays with 2 HDD first rather than 2 bays as you can increase your HDD later when you need it, plus 4 bays hardware is usually more powerful. 2 bays too limited and you can't upgrade it when needed.

 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0109sec    0.48    6 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 16th December 2025 - 10:07 AM