Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mini NASes marry NVMe to Intel's efficient chip

jeffgeerling.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 261 posts

Re: Mini NASes marry NVMe to Intel's efficient chip

#191

Post by olavgg »

markhahn wrote: post #126
acranox wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t forget about power. If you’re trying to build a low power NAS, those hdds idle around 5w each, while the ssd is closer to 5mw. Once you’ve got a few disks, the HDDs can account for half the power or more. The cost penalty for 2TB or 4TB ssds is still big, but not as bad as at the 8TB level.

such power claims are problematic - you're not letting the HDs spin down, for instance, and not crediting the fact that an SSD may easily dissipate more power than an HD under load. (in this thread, the host and network are slow, so it's not relevant that SSDs are far faster when active.)

I experimented with spindowns, but the fact is, many applications needs to write to disk several times per minute. Because of this I only use SSD's now. Archived files are moved to the Cloud. I think Google Disk is one of the best alternatives out there, as it has true data streaming built in the MacOS or Windows clients. It feels like an external hard drive.

Re: Mini NASes marry NVMe to Intel's efficient chip

#192

Post by dwedge »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #187
dwedge wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the drives are the same age and large parts of the drive haven't been read from for a long time until the rebuild you might find it already failed. Anecdotally around 12 years ago the chances of a second disk failing during a raid 5 rebuild (in our setup) was probably more like 10-20%

> and large parts of the drive haven't been read from for a long time Hence the first sentence of my three sentence post.

If I wanted to deal with snark I'd reply to people on Reddit.

Re: Mini NASes marry NVMe to Intel's efficient chip

#193

Post by irusensei »

I use a 12600H MS-01 with 5x4tb nvme. Love the SFP+ ports since the DAC cable doesn't need ethernet to SFP adapters. Intel vPro is not perfect but works just fine for remote management access. I also plug a bus powered dual ssd enclosure to it which is used for Minio object storage.

It's a file server (when did we started calling these "NAS"?) with Samba, NFS but also some database stuff. No VMs or dockers. Just a file and database server.

It has full disk encryption with TPM unlocking with my custom keys so it can boot unattended. I'm quote happy with it.

Re: Mini NASes marry NVMe to Intel's efficient chip

#194

Post by irusensei »

zerd wrote: post #130
gorkish wrote: post #90

NVMe NAS is completely and totally pointless with such crap connectivity. What in the WORLD is preventing these systems from getting at least 10gbps interfaces? I have been waiting for years and years and years and years and the only thing on the market for small systems with good networking is weird stuff that you have to email Qotom to order direct from China and _ONE_ system from Minisforum. I'm beginning to think…

It's annoying, around 10 years ago 10gbps was just starting to become more and more standard on bigger NAS, and 10gbps switches were starting to get cheaper, but then 2.5GbE came out and they all switched to that.

The SFP+ transceivers are hot and I mean literally.

Re: Mini NASes marry NVMe to Intel's efficient chip

#195

Post by asymmetric »

irusensei wrote: post #193

I use a 12600H MS-01 with 5x4tb nvme. Love the SFP+ ports since the DAC cable doesn't need ethernet to SFP adapters. Intel vPro is not perfect but works just fine for remote management access. I also plug a bus powered dual ssd enclosure to it which is used for Minio object storage. It's a file server (when did we started calling these "NAS"?) with Samba, NFS but also some database stuff. No VMs or dockers. Just a fi…

Can you expand on the TPM unlocking? Wouldn't this be vulnerable to evil maid attacks?

Re: Mini NASes marry NVMe to Intel's efficient chip

#196

Post by turnsout »

Havoc wrote: post #72
turnsout wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m a TrueNAS/FreeNAS user, currently running an ECC system. The traditional wisdom is that ECC is a must-have for ZFS. What do you think? Is this outdated?

Ultimately comes down to how important the data is to you. It's not really a technical question but one of risk tolerance

That makes sense. It’s my family photo library, so my risk tolerance is very low!

Re: Mini NASes marry NVMe to Intel's efficient chip

#197

Post by sixothree »

markhahn wrote: post #126
acranox wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t forget about power. If you’re trying to build a low power NAS, those hdds idle around 5w each, while the ssd is closer to 5mw. Once you’ve got a few disks, the HDDs can account for half the power or more. The cost penalty for 2TB or 4TB ssds is still big, but not as bad as at the 8TB level.

such power claims are problematic - you're not letting the HDs spin down, for instance, and not crediting the fact that an SSD may easily dissipate more power than an HD under load. (in this thread, the host and network are slow, so it's not relevant that SSDs are far faster when active.)

I've put all of my surveillance cameras on one volume in _hopes_ that I can let my other volumes spin down. But nope. They spend the vast majority of their day spinning.

Re: Mini NASes marry NVMe to Intel's efficient chip

#199

Post by ThatMedicIsASpy »

ndiddy wrote: post #109
sandreas wrote: post #49

While it may be tempting to go "mini" and NVMe, for a normal use case I think this is hardly cost effective. You give up so much by using an all in mini device... No Upgrades, no ECC, harder cooling, less I/O. I have had a Proxmox Server with a used Fujitsu D3417 and 64gb ecc for roughly 5 years now, paid 350 bucks for the whole thing and upgraded the storage once from 1tb to 2tb. It draws 12-14W in normal day use an…

Another thing is that unless you have a very specific need for SSDs (such as heavily random access focused workloads, very tight space constraints, or working in a bumpy environment), mechanical hard drives are still way more cost effective for storing lots of data than NVMe. You can get a manufacturer refurbished 12TB hard drive with a multi-year warranty for ~$120, while even an 8TB NVMe drive goes for at least $50…

Low power, low noise, low profile system, LOW ENTRY COST. I can easily get a beelink me mini or two and build a NAS + offsite storage. Two 1TB SSDs for a mirror are around 100€, two new 1TB HDDs are around 80€.

You are thinking in dimensions normal people have no need for. Just the numbers alone speaks volumes, 12TB, 6 hdds, 8TB NVMes, 2.5GB LAN.

Re: Mini NASes marry NVMe to Intel's efficient chip

#200

Post by billfor »

espadrine wrote: post #178
sandreas wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any (semi-)scientific proof to that (serious question)? I did search a lot to this topic but found nothing...

Here is someone that had significant corruption until they stopped: https://www.xda-developers.com/why-not-to-spin-down-nas-hard... There are many similar articles.

I wonder if it has to do with the type of HDD. The red NAS drives may not like to be spun down as much. I spin down my drives and have not had a problem except for one drive, after 10 years continuous running, but I use consumer desktop drives which probably expect to be cycled a lot more than a NAS.
Post reply on HN