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

The Synology End Game

lowendbox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 360 posts

Re: The Synology End Game

#291

Post by tern »

bkazez wrote: post #220
tern wrote: post #22

I don't have any personal experience, but I passively follow video editor YouTube and everybody's talking about switching to a UNAS Pro[1], which integrates tightly with the UniFi gear people already love. I'm happy to see it—looks great, it's priced insanely well, and I can see myself switching from Synology in the future. In other news, I've been a fan of LucidLink[2] for awhile, which you can use to avoid needing…

I do video postproduction and am trying to archive/backup 100-250GB of large files per month. Ended up very slowly rsyncing to Synology NAS, confirming checksums with another script, using Synology onboard stuff to backup to AWS, and dealing with all the totally random hard drive noise. If I want to work on one of these old projects, I have to download it locally so 4K editing works. Meanwhile my old projects back wh…

If you can afford it, https://shade.inc/ or https://www.lucidlink.com/ are magic. Rather than downloading that 4K file entirely before you start, it will download chunks as you need them while editing. Avoids the NAS entirely, though you may want separate backups.

If you're local to your equipment (and can afford it), 10G local network with UNAS Pro. Search YouTube for "unas pro video editing" and there are various people discussing their setups. In this setup, your connection to the NAS is fast enough that file transfer speeds aren't such a problem, and the NAS software is nicer to deal with.

And, I know less about it, but you might want to investigate: https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/blackmagiccloudbac...

Finally, check https://www.reddit.com/r/editors/. Lots of good threads there.

Re: The Synology End Game

#292

Post by mrighele »

> I have to imagine one can find a case that allows tons of drives and is still powered by something modest.

I found it almost impossible to find a case which has a fair number of bays (at least 6), is meant for an human environment (i.e. it is not ugly or meant for a rack) and doesn't cost a lot.

So I am now working on hanging an ikea skadis on the wall and attaching everything to it. The big panel has just the right space for everything (10 disks, mobo, extra sata controller, PSU), it is ridiculously cheap, I had fun designing the parts and 3d printing them (though there are many available for free on the web) and it gives easy access to the disks and can be a topic of discussion when friends come over. Not sure it will work properly though :-) (issues may arise with vibrations, temperatures etc).

As an alternative to make it completely visible, I though about doing the opposite, hiding inside regular furniture. You can easily find metal frames meant for an "open chassis" to properly arrange motherboard, disks etc, so it is doable. The easiest would be using a regular cupboard, but I would love to use an ottoman and be able sit on top of it, a la cray-1. I "only" need to solve the issue of hiding the cable, and giving proper ventilation.

Re: The Synology End Game

#293

Post by benoau »

mihaaly wrote: post #273
codeflo wrote: post #12

The year is 2025. Delivering a good product is not considered profitable enough anymore. If a company or product is beloved by customers then that means it doesn't squeeze them to the max. This is clearly money left on the table that someone will sooner or later extract. High-end brands are not exempt from this.

Our organization joined this trend some years ago. The original founders (did ca. 30-35 years ago) passed 60 and cashing out. Sold the company to an investor. Small fish, <100 employee, but in a niche of engineering app development with long time clients, very long time clients. Since then, we are a self declared sales oriented organization, company meetings are about success stories of billing more for the same serv…

Sounds like they're only missing an epiphany about offshoring the engineering!

Re: The Synology End Game

#294

Post by OptionOfT »

tecleandor wrote: post #48

Not only that, but their security situation is terrible. Their OS is full of EOL'ed stuff. On products you can buy TODAY, you find: - Their Btrfs filesystem is a fork of a very old branch and doesn't have modern patches - A custom, non standard, self built, ACL system for the filesystem - Kernel 4.4 - PHP 7.4 (requirement for their Hyperbackup app) - smbd 4.15 - PostgreSQL 11.11 - smbd 8.2p1 - Redis 6.2.8 - ... They…

They also have this weird full disk encryption that doesn't validate that the boot partition is compromised, allowing exploits like this: https://forums.spacerex.co/t/bounty-first-person-to-share-ho...

This breaks both the 'store key locally' and the KMIP setup.

And for their file-based encryption you cannot change the password. You need to create a new folder with a new password and copy all files over.

Re: The Synology End Game

#295

Post by vunderba »

pjmlp wrote: post #194
TheCondor wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m a fan of optical storage and its durability (with reasonable care.) But the problem is when you need to recover and have 20 Blu-ray Discs with important data scattered about, it takes days. Or when there is a specific piece of data you want/need and only have a vague idea of where it is/was in history. Maybe if those ultra capacity discs took hold but it looks like the era of optical is ending

Same applies to NAS, how many hours have you spent clicking around shared folders on company NAS / cloud storage, to track down where a specific set of files are actually located? Search isn't helpful if the stuff wasn't properly indexed.

Sure, but clicking through a folder set on a single managed volume is orders of magnitude easier than rooting through a hundred blue ray DVDs, popping each one into your optical reader in the hopes that it is the correct one, and then having to search within that volume.

Re: The Synology End Game

#296

Post by pessimizer »

gmueckl wrote: post #248
CamperBob2 wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few watts more or less is so far down any sane list of concerns when selecting a NAS solution, I can't believe it's dominating the discussion here.

Depends on what electricity costs in your place. It can be anywhere from 10 ct/kWh to 45 ct/kWh and that makes a huge difference at the end of the month.

A huge difference, or between a (10W x (8,760 hours/12) x 10¢/kWh =) 73¢ and $3.29 difference per month?

Re: The Synology End Game

#297

Post by pessimizer »

M95D wrote: post #281
CamperBob2 wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rich people I know got that way by being very selective regarding what they care about.

You're most probably right, but this discussion started with my statement that there are no low power NAS boards. The need for low power NAS boards is an entirely different matter. And so are advices on how to get rich.

> It's nice to be rich and not care, isn't it...

Re: The Synology End Game

#299

Post by christkv »

master_crab wrote: post #229
Shank wrote: post #65

I recently moved all of my NAS needs to a UNAS Pro and just have an old Intel Bean Canyon NUC in the closet running apps on top of it. Portainer is a reasonable docker frontend, though not perfect -- but more importantly, the storage is just separated from the NAS entirely. As long as your NAS can serve files to a secondary server, you the sky is the limit with what you have actually accessing the files and doing thi…

How’s the UNAS? I’m firmly in the UI ecosystem for networking and security and looked at it earlier this year (I think they released the offering only in the past 12-24 months). But my synology 1221 is fairly new so I have at least 5 (probably more) years left of useful life in it. UI isn’t without their own faults but allowing their unifios to run on grey boxes has improved my opinion of them further.

That’s what I’m running and it’s been great so far have 7x16gb in raid 5 since reading is the main use case

Re: The Synology End Game

#300

Post by benoau »

Marsymars wrote: post #263
benoau wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but these days you can easily have one system with 10 - 20 cores so you should be able to handle both workloads very well.

You can, but for media serving and transcoding you ideally want Intel Quick Sync, and it's simpler to have separate systems for your Quick Sync system and your "many cores" system.

Both of the CPUs you mention are low-power I don't think this a problem for slightly meatier processors unless you need the GPU or Quick Sync for multiple purposes?
Post reply on HN