There are far too many factors to give a generalized statement on that question. If you're doing mostly large monolithic file transfers, adding more drives could help because you're spreading the load over multiple drives. The parity calculation shouldn't even be noticeable in a healthy array. Are you using software raid or is it done by a raid card? If it's done by a raid card, I wouldn't even worry about going from 6 to 7 drives with regards to parity overhead. I'm running two sets of 10 drives in software raid 6 and it's not even a concern.
Home NAS
- Thread starter LiamC
- Start date
There are far too many factors to give a generalized statement on that question. If you're doing mostly large monolithic file transfers, adding more drives could help because you're spreading the load over multiple drives. The parity calculation shouldn't even be noticeable in a healthy array. Are you using software raid or is it done by a raid card? If it's done by a raid card, I wouldn't even worry about going from 6 to 7 drives with regards to parity overhead. I'm running two sets of 10 drives in software raid 6 and it's not even a concern.
It is in the Synology with the quad-core Xenon. I suppose it doesn't matter too much.
But you do like them and would buy more?
Stereodude
Not really a
Why would more drives cause the parity calculation to be more complex?
I have no idea. So what are the parameters?
Howell
Storage? I am Storage!
It would add no more load to parity calculations and would spread the work over more spindles. Win.
Synology has a DX1215 expansion unit for the DS3617xs, etc. that connects by a fairly short inifiband cable.
Does anyone have experience with this type of cable or expanding the NAS? I would create a separate array of lower speed drives so the impact of the external interface is unimportant, but I would like to run a 2m cable between the NAS and expansion box. Thanks.
Does anyone have experience with this type of cable or expanding the NAS? I would create a separate array of lower speed drives so the impact of the external interface is unimportant, but I would like to run a 2m cable between the NAS and expansion box. Thanks.
If it's infiniband the cable might conform to an SFP+ or QSFP+ depending on the speed. Those connection types are a standard and depending on how far you need to run a cable you will have shorter limits using DAC copper cable vs going with fiber optics.
Can you provide the specs for the Infiniband interface on the DX1215?
Can you provide the specs for the Infiniband interface on the DX1215?
It appears to be an SFF-8470, a trapezoidal type of connector. I'm not familiar with it, only SFF-8087 and SFF-8088.
https://www.servethehome.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/SFF-8470-Infiniband-CX4-Connectors.jpg
https://www.servethehome.com/sas-sa...8088-8470-8482-8484-single-device-connectors/
I suppose I can order and take a chance.
Last edited by a moderator:
I found this fanless switch for 10GbE. It has only four SFP+ ports, but noiseless is nice.
Stereodude
Not really a
MikroTik has one even cheaper (under $150) if you can live with 2 SFP+ ports.
https://mikrotik.com/product/CSS326-24G-2SplusRM
Stereodude
Not really a
Uh, maybe you only have two 10gb devices.
Then what would be the need for a switch? The NAS have GbE ports as well. I'm sure some normal single users would find a use, but it wouldn't work for me. :lol:
Of course in a datacenter the incoming 10GbE is distributed to the groups or individuals of gBE users.
IIRC Coug mentioned that Lithuanian brand a while ago. I cannot find any for sale online in the US.
Stereodude
Not really a
Maybe the two systems with 10gb need to talk to each other over a very high bandwidth link and still talk to other systems and you don't want the headache of connecting the two 10gb systems directly to each other and also to a 1gbE switch and have to manage which interface they use for transferring data in every program / protocol.
I'm sure there are a lot of possibilities, but I'd rather have more ports. Four would be the least, but eight would be nice for future proofing.
I really should be buying a new monitor before the NAS updrages.
I really should be buying a new monitor before the NAS updrages.
Stereodude
Not really a
For me, I only need two SPF+ once I initially go 10gb. The MicroTik would work. Sure, it doesn't have any room for expansion, but it's cheap enough that by the time I need to add a 3rd 10gb computer (not anytime soon) there will likely be other cheap fanless switch options with more SPF+ ports that cost likely less than the TP-Link.
I doubt you will see SFP+ interface go away any time soon. It's quite versatile by allowing you to select direct attached copper cables or to go to fiber optic for longer distances and improved signal to noise because there is no electrostatic interference. Performance, latency, and power consumption is also better at the receptacle ends when compared to an RJ45 connection type.
Thanks. I decided on the cheap route and added the 5-pack USB to the backup NAS.
ddrueding
Fixture
Agree on the SFP+, multi-interface cards are cheap enough that with small installs you can bridge between devices and skip switches altogether if you like.
My brains are exploding trying to find a workaround for the encrypter.
The eternal QNAP has horrible performance <50MB/sec. with the volume level password. I cannot use something like the Truecrypt since it craps out when larger files are created.
Is there some other tool, maybe a container that increases size as needed without the requirement to be static?
The eternal QNAP has horrible performance <50MB/sec. with the volume level password. I cannot use something like the Truecrypt since it craps out when larger files are created.
Is there some other tool, maybe a container that increases size as needed without the requirement to be static?
Sounds like you need a thin-provisioned filesystem that you can extend over time and has been encrypted. I can't help with QNAP devices; I've never used one of their products.
I want to pull 5 drives as a group and store them offsite. Maybe the UX was a mistake, but I wanted to make some use of the extra drives.
The only other option is to use the 5 in the Synology, but then I cannot expand the main array past 7.
QNAP does not support encrypted folders for some reason, not that it would help in this case.
The only other option is to use the 5 in the Synology, but then I cannot expand the main array past 7.
QNAP does not support encrypted folders for some reason, not that it would help in this case.
Are these 5 drives part of some raid set? Are they just JBOD?
I don't know what you're referring to for the UX being a mistake.
Buy a larger array or build your own and use a basic filesystem.
Encrypt the data at the OS level if the array doesn't support it.
I don't know what you're referring to for the UX being a mistake.
Buy a larger array or build your own and use a basic filesystem.
Encrypt the data at the OS level if the array doesn't support it.
It should be RAID 5. The stupid NAS is wimpy for encryption and surprisingly worse on the eternal UX500P.
Stereodude
Not really a
Why are you encrypting the thing in the first place? Do you not have physical control of it?
Not unless you include UPS or FedeX.
DrunkenBastard
Storage is cool
Is it within driving/flying range? Send the drives accompanied with a trusted colleague as carry on, chassis checked in.
Stereodude
Not really a
It's pretty hard to help when you speak in riddles and we know 5% of the story.
I'm thinking about data losses lately, so I'd like to have a whole set of the most important stuff offsite and updated more regularly.
That is a good point! For now I'm hoping of course that there is no catastrophe that destroys the home hardware. If necessary then buying some hardware will not be the main issue. Obviously it is not feasible in the long term, but may be fine until the summer of 2020.
I am working with the Verano Crypt, which has an expansion function. One container is 9TB and is increasing to 14. This is my last attempt without buying additional drives.