Live data from Hacker News

The Cheapest NAS

sigwait.org

171–180 of 308 posts

Re: The Cheapest NAS

#171
post #113
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are all strategies and the price point of the unit doesn’t affect it. Need extra drives, buy extra drives. Need extra NAS for backups?, buy an extra NAS. Need an offsite copy?, buy space and get an offsite NAS and drives for an offsite copy. Price point of the unit doesn’t change anything here.

Synology sure provides an expensive but complete package for home office and enthusiasts. Just buy it and be done with it. It's certainly more expensive than DIY it yourself using off the shelf components and things bought out of online classifieds. But for most people that have no interest in tinkering or don't know what to do, just paying the price of a complete solution might be worth it.

I had a (dis)pleasure of running multiple Synology units in a business setting. They do die out on you like everything else if not more frequent, the QC is generally non-existent.

Re: The Cheapest NAS

#173
post #113
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are all strategies and the price point of the unit doesn’t affect it. Need extra drives, buy extra drives. Need extra NAS for backups?, buy an extra NAS. Need an offsite copy?, buy space and get an offsite NAS and drives for an offsite copy. Price point of the unit doesn’t change anything here.

Synology sure provides an expensive but complete package for home office and enthusiasts. Just buy it and be done with it. It's certainly more expensive than DIY it yourself using off the shelf components and things bought out of online classifieds. But for most people that have no interest in tinkering or don't know what to do, just paying the price of a complete solution might be worth it.

>DIY it yourself

Look, I'm sorry, but you literally asked for this:

Hello, I'm from the Department of Redundancy Department with a citation for a "Do It Yourself it yourself". Please pay the fine in internet chuckles, thank you.

Re: The Cheapest NAS

#174
post #4

When people set up these NAS's, how are they accessing the files? NFS? SFTP? And how are you accessing it when away from home? A VPN that you're permanently connected to? Is there a good way to do NAT hole-punching? Syncthing kind of does what I want, in that it lets all my computers sync the same files no matter what network they're on, but it insists on always copying all the files ("syncing") whereas I just want t…

SMB and Tailscale.

Re: The Cheapest NAS

#175
post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Synology sure provides an expensive but complete package for home office and enthusiasts. Just buy it and be done with it. It's certainly more expensive than DIY it yourself using off the shelf components and things bought out of online classifieds. But for most people that have no interest in tinkering or don't know what to do, just paying the price of a complete solution might be worth it.

>DIY it yourself Look, I'm sorry, but you literally asked for this: Hello, I'm from the Department of Redundancy Department with a citation for a "Do It Yourself it yourself". Please pay the fine in internet chuckles, thank you.

if the I or the Y stop working or get corrupted, the redundancy allows you to recover them properly from the spelled out words.

Re: The Cheapest NAS

#176
post #34

The cheapest NAS is usually just taking some old desktop PC and repurposing it headless. :-)

Assuming power is free. Even small wattage differences add up quickly for a server running 24/7 and those older CPUs can be very inefficient.

5 year old CPUs today (i.e., 2019 era chips) are generally pretty efficient.

Re: The Cheapest NAS

#177
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They did mention ZFS, so verified hashes of each file block. I hope they are scrubbing, and have at least one snapshot.

Why would one snapshot help?

One snapshot would help because, if EVERYTHING collapses, and you need data recovery, the snapshot provides a basepoint for the recovery. This should allow better recovery of metadata. Not that this should EVER happen -- it is just a good idea. I use Jim Salter's syncoid/sanoid to make snapshots, age them out, and send data to another pool.

I agree that ECC is a damn good idea - I use it on my home server. But, my lappy (i5 thinkpad) doesn't have it.

Re: The Cheapest NAS

#178
post #4

When people set up these NAS's, how are they accessing the files? NFS? SFTP? And how are you accessing it when away from home? A VPN that you're permanently connected to? Is there a good way to do NAT hole-punching? Syncthing kind of does what I want, in that it lets all my computers sync the same files no matter what network they're on, but it insists on always copying all the files ("syncing") whereas I just want t…

I use NFS over WireGuard. That way I can mount my resources wherever I go and it's encrypted whether I'm at home or out.

Re: The Cheapest NAS

#180
post #156
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's OK for corporate systems, but complete overkill for personal setups. My personal files are ultimately a lot more important to me and much more irreplaceable than any files at work. I'd never run a NAS without ZFS and ECC.

I don’t think I’ve ever had ECC, and have never had any issues. What kind of problems would you expect to see?

Well part of it is you likely won't see the problem until a long time after it happens. But on servers with ECC and reporting I saw several different patterns:

a) 99%+ (or something) of the servers had zero reported errors for their lifetime. Memory usually works, no problems experienced.

b) Some of the servers reported one error, one time, and then all was well for the rest of their life. If this happens without ECC, and you're lucky, it's in some memory that doesn't really matter and it's no big deal. Or maybe it crashes your kernel because it's in the right spot (flip a bit in a pointer/return address and it's easy to crash). Or maybe it managed to flip a bit in a pending write and your file is stored wrong and the zfs checksum is calculated on the wrong data. If you're really unlucky, you could probably write bad metadata and have a real hard time mounting the filesystem later?

c) some servers reported the same address with a correctable error once a day; probably one bit stuck, any time data transits that address, that bit is still stuck, and that will likely cause trouble. If it's used for kernel memory, you'll probably end up crashing sooner or later.

d) some servers had a lot more ram errors; sometimes a slow ramp to a hundred a day, once or twice a rapid ramp to so many that the system spent most of its time handling machine check exceptions, but did manage to stay online but developed a queue it could never process. Once you're at these levels, you'll probably get crashes, but you might write some bad data first.

Ram testing helps on systems without ECC, but you won't really know if/when the ram has gone from working 100% to working almost 100%. I have a desktop that was running fine for a while, tests fine, but crashes in ways that have to be bad ram, and removing one stick seems to have fixed it.

Post reply on HN