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

251–260 of 261 posts

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

#251

Post by privatelypublic »

magicalhippo wrote: post #60
privatelypublic wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

QLC isn't an issue for consumer NAS- are 'you' seriously going to write 160GB/day, every day?

QLC have quite the write performance cliff though, which could be an issue during use or when rebuilding the array. Just something to be aware of.

Same response, basically: take a 1000MB/s drive, it takes 120s before it drops down to 20MB/s... where are you going to source 120gigabytes- on a routine basis.

Not saying premium drives dont have their place- but for 95% of people $200/TB ($100 premium over lower tiers) is a waste.

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

#252

Post by neurostimulant »

guerby wrote: post #81

Related question: does anyone know of an usb-c powerbank that can be effectively used as UPS? That is to say is able to be charged while maintaining power to load (obviously with rate of charge greater by a few watts than load). Most models I find reuse the most powerful usb-c port as ... recharging port so unusable as DC UPS. Context: my home server is my old https://frame.work motherboard running proxmox VE with 64…

The battery will eventually degrade, so how about using a portable power station with replaceable 18650 cells? Essentially a powerbank with replaceable 18650 cells. They're a bit bulky but you can replace the degraded cells as needed.

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

#254

Post by BeelinkOfficial »

ezschemi wrote: post #143

I was about to order that GMKtek G9 and then saw Jeff's video about it on the same day. All those issues, even with the later fixes he showed, are a big no-no for me. Instead, I went with a Odroid H4-Ultra with an Intel N305, 48GB Crucial DDR5 and 4x4TB Samsung 990 Evo SSDs (low-power usage) + a 2TB SATA SSD to boot from. Yes, the SSDs are way overkill and pretty expensive at $239 per Samsung 990 Evo (got them with a…

Hi, we’ve tested the ME mini under typical workloads using six 4TB SSDs (Samsung, Crucial, and WD), and the system runs cool — temperatures usually stay between 40–50°C, with stable airflow and efficient cooling.

If you have any other questions, feel free to contact our support team at support-pc@bee-link.com — we’re always happy to help!

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

#255

Post by justinclift »

sandreas wrote: post #236
justinclift wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gen 11 HPE Microservers seem pretty decent: https://buy.hpe.com/us/en/compute/tower-servers/proliant-mic... Pity they're Intel cpu's though. :( HPE have announced 12th Gen servers for their other lines recently, so maybe the Microservers will get a 12th Gen update this year too. Hopefully with AMD cpus rather than the Intel crap.

Personally i find these too expensive compared to the good old N54L and Dell T20 era. The Hardware is great but >1000 bucks is pretty hard even for enthusiasts

The Gen8 stuff is pretty good, though the 16GB ram maximum for those is what's causing me to look at upgrades. :)

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

#256

Post by 7e »

yonatan8070 wrote: post #53
7e wrote: post #44

These need remote management capabilities (IPMI) to not be a huge PITA.

How often do you use IPMI on a server? I have a regular desktop running Proxmox, and I haven't had to plug in a monitor since I first installed it like 2 years ago

On every boot. Root partition encryption keys are stored externally. Also, the Linux kernel will panic on these small machines regularly.

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

#258

Post by fnord77 »

UltraSane wrote: post #253
fnord77 wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

not if you value silence and compactness

A disk NAS isn't very large or loud.

For my purposes, a disk NAS is both too large and too noisy.

The only place I can put a NAS is my living room. I'm not putting a fucking 4-bay synology on my entertainment shelf. And if I can hear it, it is too loud.

these mini-NAS boxes are about the size of a single 3.5 HDD

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

#259

Post by gorkish »

atmanactive wrote: post #155
zerd wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That's because 10GbE tech is not there yet. Everything overheats and drops-out all the time, while 2.5GbE just works. In several years from now, this will all change, of course.

10GbaseT and SFP+ DAC are a world apart. The latter is now extremely power efficient. But even modern 10GbaseT parts are considerably improved

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

#260

Post by gorkish »

9x39 wrote: post #108
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…

>What in the WORLD is preventing these systems from getting at least 10gbps interfaces? Price and price. Like another commenter said, there is at least one 10Gbe mini NAS out there, but it's several times more expensive. What's the use case for the 10GbE? Is ~200MB/sec not enough? I think the segment for these units is low price, small size, shared connectivity. The kind of thing you tuck away in your house invisibly…

> What's the use case for the 10GbE? Is ~200MB/sec not enough?

Yes; its far from close enough. My litmus test for consumers is, can they put their video files on network storage and work with them? And with modern cellphone video, the answer is no it is not convenient to do that. Consumer networking is in a tarpit. Business grade systems have networking that is three orders of magnitude faster; there is no other component between systems that are that dissimilar in performance, not even GPUs.

Post reply on HN