Thecus N1200PRO vs QNAP TS-EC1279U-RP

[CougTek]

I'm looking at NAS for our server network. While HP has really nice options, they are prohibitively expensive, so I'm looking elsewhere. So far, I hesitate between the Thecus N1200Pro with an Intel X520-DA2 dual-port 10GbE NIC and a QNAP TS-EC1279U-RP. The later cost around 500$ more for similar features. I need at least two 10GbE SFP+ DAC (copper) ports. Ideally, I'd get two identical NAS and configure them in failover mode with each other. I'd use Western Digital Caviar Red 3.5" drives for the bulk storage. SSD would be too expensive for a reasonable capacity. We already have one lower-end Thecus NAS, but it's used for something else and it doesn't have the features I'm looking for to be deployed in the architectural change I'll push.

It will be used to backup and perhaps even run VM from all the other servers (up to 16 servers and close to 80 VMs). We'll use Server 2012 Datacenter with Hyper-V for the Windows VMs. I'm still unsure what to chose for the Linux VMss (Either Xen server or ESXi). All the servers will have Intel SSD (DC S3700) for their main storage.

Which one would you chose and why? Any experience with those models or products from those companies? Would you suggest something else instead? I need at least 10TB of usable storage, redundancy at all levels, 2x SFP+ DAC ports per NAS and all the setup fitting within 20K$, ideally 15K$. Regarding the storage capacity and speed, the more the better, of course. Some loose for expendability/improvement would be welcome too.

 

[Mercutio]

I've configured 4 and 8 bay units from Drobo, QNAP, Synology and Buffalo, but somehow I don't think that experience translates to the high dollar units.
I will say that I've liked Synology's firmware better than anyone else's, in spite of their slightly goofy "let's obscure the details of what RAID is!" marketing lingo. I think the DS3612XS fits your requirements as well.

For the most part, the brand-name NAS boxes are all about the same, though the ones I've used have all had anemic Atom CPUs and very limited feature sets outside the usual options for a storage appliance.

 

[CougTek]

I forgot to tell that I want something rackmountable. The Synology RS3412RPxs would fit the bill. Thanks for bringing Synology to the table.

Also, I specifically chose NAS with quad-core Xeon because the last thing I want is something anemic (like an Atom). The NAS will be used for several years and I prefer to aim too high rather than too low and ending up having to replace the unit prematurely because of insufficient performances or capacity.

 

[CougTek]

Oh and I made a mistake. It's the Thecus N12000Pro, not N1200Pro. Sorry.

 

[Handruin]

I'm looking at NAS for our server network. While HP has really nice options, they are prohibitively expensive, so I'm looking elsewhere. So far, I hesitate between the Thecus N1200Pro with an Intel X520-DA2 dual-port 10GbE NIC and a QNAP TS-EC1279U-RP. The later cost around 500$ more for similar features. I need at least two 10GbE SFP+ DAC (copper) ports. Ideally, I'd get two identical NAS and configure them in failover mode with each other. I'd use Western Digital Caviar Red 3.5" drives for the bulk storage. SSD would be too expensive for a reasonable capacity. We already have one lower-end Thecus NAS, but it's used for something else and it doesn't have the features I'm looking for to be deployed in the architectural change I'll push.

It will be used to backup and perhaps even run VM from all the other servers (up to 16 servers and close to 80 VMs). We'll use Server 2012 Datacenter with Hyper-V for the Windows VMs. I'm still unsure what to chose for the Linux VMss (Either Xen server or ESXi). All the servers will have Intel SSD (DC S3700) for their main storage.

Which one would you chose and why? Any experience with those models or products from those companies? Would you suggest something else instead? I need at least 10TB of usable storage, redundancy at all levels, 2x SFP+ DAC ports per NAS and all the setup fitting within 20K$, ideally 15K$. Regarding the storage capacity and speed, the more the better, of course. Some loose for expendability/improvement would be welcome too.

I know I don't have an answer to your NAS question but regarding the usage of VMware for Linux, why not try using Hyper-V for your Linux systems rather than manage two separate machines?

I know that SmallNetBuilder often times puts together reviews on the brands of NAS you're looking into. See if they can offer any additional information:
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/

Is it feasible for you to build your own NAS or does it have to be a paid product solution? What happens when your NAS has a problem and needs maintenance?

 

[Mercutio]

Hyper-V's official Linux support is limited to SuSE, which is pretty much nobody's first choice for "server" Linux other than Microsoft.

 

[Handruin]

Hyper-V's official Linux support is limited to SuSE, which is pretty much nobody's first choice for "server" Linux other than Microsoft.

That would be an incorrect assessment. Suse is quite standard adoption on a corporate level and has a big name especially when you're in the market of building virtual appliances. The end user may not know they are using Suse but they are getting it with their appliance. I actually quite fond of sles and its abilities. I deploy dozens of these per week.

 

[Mercutio]

I use SuSE at home, but I understand that RedHat/Fedora/Oracle derivatives are still the generally preferred choice for commercial applications. I wonder how much Microsoft's support for Novell and SuSE influenced decision making at EMC.

 

[Handruin]

I use SuSE at home, but I understand that RedHat/Fedora/Oracle derivatives are still the generally preferred choice for commercial applications. I wonder how much Microsoft's support for Novell and SuSE influenced decision making at EMC.

I'm not saying the others aren't still sought after for commercial application but for a virtualized appliances and VMs, SLES works great.
None that I'm aware of. We have dipped a little into testing SLES appliances on Hyper-V but so far there is no market demand for it in our realm. The use of SuSe was due to compatibility, maintainability, and the longer-term plan for support with VMware studio. We have a small team (that I sit right next to) who manages the appliance development framework. There was extensive thought and planning to move away from rPath Linux. I seriously disliked working with rPath. SLES has been a breeze to manage and build/deploy packages on. The OS also performs rather well in a virtualized environment.

 

[CougTek]

I know I don't have an answer to your NAS question but regarding the usage of VMware for Linux, why not try using Hyper-V for your Linux systems rather than manage two separate machines?

I'll have to look into this. I wasn't aware that there was Hyper-V support elsewhere than on MS OSes.

Is it feasible for you to build your own NAS or does it have to be a paid product solution? What happens when your NAS has a problem and needs maintenance?

It would certainly be possible, but we are only two technicians here and neither of us ever programmed a NAS out of nothing before. It would be pretty time consuming and it would be presumptuous of us to think we would be able to do something more reliable than a mature product from a company specialized in that field. Gambling the reliability of our NAS solution and spending all that time configuring it just to save ~1500$ per NAS, I'm not sure it's worth it.

Also, I believe that given Handruin's work environment, he's quite well placed to know what's popular and what's not for businesses in general. I trust his word on that.

 

[Handruin]

I'll have to look into this. I wasn't aware that there was Hyper-V support elsewhere than on MS OSes.


It would certainly be possible, but we are only two technicians here and neither of us ever programmed a NAS out of nothing before. It would be pretty time consuming and it would be presumptuous of us to think we would be able to do something more reliable than a mature product from a company specialized in that field. Gambling the reliability of our NAS solution and spending all that time configuring it just to save ~1500$ per NAS, I'm not sure it's worth it.

Also, I believe that given Handruin's work environment, he's quite well placed to know what's popular and what's not for businesses in general. I trust his word on that.

I wasn't suggesting programming your own NAS. You could even try something like Server 2012 or Storage Server 2012 to get you CIFS, NFS, and iSCSI NAS mounts to your client machines. Storage Server 2012 supports all of those. You would also be able to get the appropriate well-performing 10Gb NICs and also use the pool feature to manage the storage. It's a compromise in the respect that now you are managing the NAS server but you also have more flexibility with the components.

Your comment about gambling the reliability based on your skills is somewhat troublesome because you're already putting all your eggs into a single basket with any NAS solution you've started planning for. This is why I asked what you would do if you had to bring your NAS down for maintenance or failure. Regardless of if you build your own or one from a reputable company, you need to have a plan in place to account for when it will fail, not if. I know you're trying to do the best you can with the budget you have but at least consider the what-ifs that will happen if your NAS is down for 2-hours, 6-hours, 24-hours...etc.

Also what is your plan to expand your NAS once it has filled up?

Would it be worth trying a call to EMC for pricing/solutions? I don't know if it would be within your budget but they do have a VNXe platform that is aimed at smaller business. It seems to meet all your requirements except possibly for cost. I honestly have no idea what they cost. There is also another interesting product we have (from a company acquisition) called Isilon. It's a node-based scale-out NAS architecture. It's actually quite neat because of their OneFS concept. If these suggestions are out of line because they are self-promoting for the place I work I'll edit my post and remove them.

 

[Mercutio]

I'm not so much arguing as making an observation about what commercial vendors seem most willing to support.
RedHat *is* a mess, which is why I stepped away from it as well.

At any rate, it's not that difficult to roll your own NAS, but I'm sure Coug doesn't want one more entirely different thing to maintain, even setting aside the possible cost savings.

It might be worthwhile to get one or two of the smaller appliances - like a two-bay NAS - to get some idea of how the firmware works and to see the various features and implementations in action prior to the purchase of a big guy. Even if you have to pay a restocking fee and shipping back to a vendor, that's probably the best way to get a decent audition.

 

[CougTek]

Your comment about gambling the reliability based on your skills is somewhat troublesome because you're already putting all your eggs into a single basket with any NAS solution you've started planning for. This is why I asked what you would do if you had to bring your NAS down for maintenance or failure. Regardless of if you build your own or one from a reputable company, you need to have a plan in place to account for when it will fail, not if. I know you're trying to do the best you can with the budget you have but at least consider the what-ifs that will happen if your NAS is down for 2-hours, 6-hours, 24-hours...etc.

That is why I want to get two NAS configured to backup/replace each other.

From Thecus's N12000Pro product page :

High Availability (System Redundancy)
For the first time, your data is completely free of delays in access. Regardless of the situation, HA actively keeps your data on two separate, identical NAS. If one needs maintenance, the other will dutifully rise to the occasion without as much as a blip in service. Whether rain, shine, or Armageddon, your data will always be there.

That should do the trick.

I'll look into your Isilon thing later. There's never too many backups.

Also, Merc is right when he wrte that Coug doesn't want to complicate his life maintaining another entirely different thing. In fact, Coug doesn't mind spending a lot of time to find the best solution, but once the solution will be deployed, then Coug wants his life to be simple and surprise-free.

 

[Howell]

It is very difficult to predict if a storage solution will meet your needs without a comparison of IOps. All other features must follow this fundemental one.

Secondly, investigate if the HA provided is realtime or cached. We had such a high change rate that the system would seize while it waited for confirmation from the other SAN that the data was safe. This was over a sub-second 10mi wan link. (Is it still a wan link if it is sub-second? )

Check into VMware's vsphere storage appliance. It is meant for SMBs and may get you back on familiar footing.

 

[CougTek]

Speaking of IOps, it would probably be best if I'd use an Enterprise-class drive, like a Seagate Constellation ES.3 for instance. Those are typically capable of double the IOps that consumer drives can achieve.

The link between both NAS wouldn't be 10 miles long. The SFP+ DAC cables are 1 meter long and there would only be one between both NAS (or two for dual link - I haven't verified how to do it...maybe I'll have to pass through the switch, I don't know). I'll check anyway if it's cached or realtime, but I really don't expect it to be an issue.

I'll look into vsphere appliances, but my assumption is that those things must be crazily expensive. HP SAN's expensive, for instance.