So I got the idea this morning that I could use another network storage solution, wanted to upgrade my Synology 2413+ but that's quite expensive. I use it with 12x4TB HDDs, which were at that time the biggest HDDs available. I use Raid6, so losing 2 of them, but I'm still only at 70% basically because I'm constantly deleting stuff and managing free space.

First idea, for some time already, was to change the HDDs to 8TB ones, but considering the costs of 8TB HDDs it would become very expensive, they're still at almost 250€/HDD, which means I would have to spend around 3000€ for the upgrade. And as it's running just fine I thought to just leave it how it is.

At the moment I'm using an enclosure as JBOD solution with 2x16TB HDDs, one for LaunchBox backup and one for important Synology 2413+ backups. I thought it might be interesting to use it in a network.

So I bought another Synology, the 920+, a 4 bay NAS. Wanted to go with the 420+, but the 920+ is quad core and comes already with 4GB of RAM, and it's only 50€ more expensive and I bought an additional 4GB RAM expansion to upgrade it straight away to 8GB.

I also bought 2 more of those 16TB HDDs and the idea is to put all 4 of them together in a NAS and run it in a Raid5 environment, so I can have a more secure backup plus obviously extra space. This will be at the cost of not even half the price compared to upgrading my 2413+ with 8TB HDDs.

In case you ask why I bought Synology and not Qnap, I already have one, which I'm very happy with (had Qnap before), and I might be able to integrate them easier into one network.
[Reply]

I used to be a fan of Qnap, but Synology is better, especially in the interface and support and abilities in terms of built in support and additional apps available.

Are you going to take advantage of the 2 M.2 SSD slots in the 920+? I've been considering buying a new NAS for sing time and this one is a good spec for the price, so in very interested in how you get on with it as I might buy one myself.
[Reply]

I was considering the M.2 SSD slots options, but I read a really in depth article about it and in my case it's not really needed. The LAN File transfer, which I use most is f.ex. not faster at all.

Here's the test: https://www.digitec.ch/de/page/der-s...-wd-blue-17912

It's in German but I guess you will understand the charts.
[Reply]

Can the M2s be used just as a cache buffer?

I can understand some German. Will take a look.
[Reply]

Just use Google Translate if you're using Chrome.

Very interesting read DC.

Still using a QNAP TS412 here & considering building a sever to replace it from my old Z77 Rig.

I'd also agree from what I've read that Synology are now ahead of QNAP. - I'd rather not waste time & money trying a Synology when transfer rates on Gigabit to a server will be infinitely faster. - I just simply hate the laggy feel to Linux on the TS412. Doing anything on it is like waiting for paint to dry & the transfer rates to the drives in the QNAP are pathetic.
[Reply]

That was an issue with some older Qnap NASs though. Overall speed can also be down to slower CPU or less ram.

Why would transfer speeds over Gigabit to a full server be any different to a NAS? It's purely reliant on the hardware and drive speeds, plus the OS and disk formats used Some new NAS's even support 10Gbit network speeds now. Plus if running on Linux can take advantage of EXT4.

The disadvantage of using a full system over a NAS is power consumption and OS overloads. Plus a NAS Linux build is streamlined to only need the parts required for the build, so no clutter or bloat.
[Reply]

Clutter & bloat.....

As Clarkson has said, ....many times....

More Power!
[Reply]

Power is not always the answer. Clarkson!
[Reply]

Screen Shot 2022-09-20 at 9.17.06 am.png

Wicked
[Reply]

Btw, what's your opinion on NAS configuration. I wanted to use it in Raid5, which is obvious with 4 HDDs, although loosing 16TB is quite a lot.

As I just had 2 of the 16TB purely as a backup in an Icy Box enclosure, my initial thought was to get an enclosure which I could also use on a network. But it's purpose will stay the same, acting as backup, as data graveyard.

What if I just configure it as a JBOD, would that make sense or would you disagree by all means?
[Reply]