My point is that you need to have a reasonable recovery concept (and frequently
proven process) to deal with a hard drive failing – mirror  or rebuildable
striping 

And that should include the possibility that it may  be the NAS housing that
fails – possibly taking the drives with it.

And the data on the still OK  drives not being in a structure accessible by any
other OS you have to hand. 

 

Yes – if you need speed striping etc. or maybe a large set of small drives ( 2¼”
laptop ones maybe – TomsHardware did a project a long while ago comparing
throughput on a large number of small drives vs a small number of large drives,
and the conclusion was the small drives option was much faster, used a lot less
power just needed more PSU and connection considerations   - as in massed add-in
drive controller boards.

 

For those considering faster storage access – SSD is the easy way, alternatively
go the volume way or ‘attach’ partitions of several drives as folders of an NTFS
OS/filestore partition/drive.    

 

HOWEVER – do make sure that :

1)      The PSU can manage the drives powering up at system startup.

2)      The BIOS can manage the drives – maybe delay/sequenced power up at
system startup.

3)      The OS can manage that much MFT data being scanned etc. at startup. 

4)      There is sufficient real memory to manage the combined  MFT data without
massive paging of memory 

 

I have a win7 ultimate system that gets itself into knots if there are more than
2 2TB drives USB attached at startup.

It happily runs with 5 drives attached if they are started up sequentially – as
in wait for the windows explorer to sho a drive before connecting the next – and
connecting means the interface cable, not just the power-brick

 

 

JimB

 

 

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of J- P
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 5:09 PM
To: NT
Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] SHR vs Traditional RAID/RED drives

 

My initial thought was raid 10  using 4tb (as thats what I use for servers) but
I was reading about their SHR and it sounded interesting in that you can use
different size drives and not lose any space

The MEDIA data that  is stored, is not "active" they do a job, transfer it
there, after 6 months it gets erased.

but I plan to use the additional storage for doing local server backups as well.
(I do back up there servers off-site but its not realistic to  pull 3TB over the
wire).

MY thought was 6 drives in raid10, then use the 2 remainig drives to copy what
is deemed critical off the raid10


 



  _____  

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 08:44:00 -0800
Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] SHR vs Traditional RAID/RED drives
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]

The WD NAS drives are only rated for groups of up to 6 and aimed squarely at the
consumer market. They're rated for something along the lines of 180TB/year and
only an error rate of 1x10^14.

 

The Red Pro drives are slightly better and built for 8-16 bay units backed by a
5 year warranty, have a 7.2K speed and a much better 1x10^15 error rate and
warrantied for 550TB/year written, also dropping in capacity to 4TB.  

 

If data is critical then move to their WD RE series drives again a 550TB/year
rating along with 7.2K spindle and 5 year warranty with an even better 1x10^16
error rate. 

 

If you need the density you pay for it in reliability currently, be prepared to
keep multiple copies. You mentioned 'terabytes of data' - how hot/cold is it? 

 

Also if you're using anything above 1TB drives please don't use RAID5 you'll
just be kicking yourself later :( 




Nathan Shelby
Lead Systems Engineer – Quote Wizard <https://quotewizard.com/> 
 <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] / 206-753-2626
Malo Periculosam Libertatem Quam Quietum Servitium

 

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 8:00 AM, J- P <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi all,

I'm looking to drop one of these in at customer site,
https://www.synology.com/en-us/products/DS1815+
I'm curious to know if anyone has elected to use their proprietary raid
SHR/SHR2, and if so how it stacks up to traditional raid in terms of
performance.

And on a separate  note , has anyone jumped onto  the  WD RED "NAS" drives yet?

I like the idea of 6TB for 270.00, but not crazy about 54k speed or 3 yr
warranty
http://www.amazon.com/Western-Digital-3-5-inch-IntelliPower-WD60EFRX/dp/B00LO3KR
96/ref=pd_bxgy_pc_text_y

however ,  226.00 for a 4TB 72k with a 5 year warranty does sit a little better

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00LO3KRM8

any feedback is appreciated




 


Reply via email to