• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

NAS Or Full Blow Windows Server

R

rosco

Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2000
Messages
722
We need to replace an existing NAS device for our small network of 10 workstations.

I'm trying to figure out if we should use this as an opportunity to put in a real Windows server and have it act as our NAS as well as taking us from peer to peer to a client/server setup.

Are there any downsides to doing it that way other than the increased cost? The NAS we would be replacing it with would be a QNAP.

The server would be a Dell maybe a T410 with 4 7200k RPM drives in RAID10.

Is there a significant slowdown have the NAS also as the server? How much overhead would be used on server functions?
 
Do you do any kind of centralized authentication? Everyone has a single set of credentials for the existing NAS? How much total storage space?

I would say QNAP NAS may cost more than a simple server, depending on how you do licensing.

Overall I'd say the server OS has fairly little overhead in todays computer terms.
 
You're better off running unix/bsd/solaris/linux if you just want storage than Windows.
//Danne
 
Are there downsides besides costs? Beyond it being a bit more complex, not really. You just have to make sure you know what you are doing, or are paying someone else to do it. There are advantages of using something like WHS 2011 like centralized backup, some basic data redundancy protection, ease of use (Windows derr....), etc... Whether you'll be taking advantage of these is the question. If you just want a NAS only, there are free alternatives that work very well on consumer grade equipment, some *nix distros are even designed specifically for storage needs too. Make sure you have a backup plan storage though like offsite storage, online cloud storage, etc...

As for going for the Dell, it all counts on whether you can afford it, and whether you are willing to pay a considerable premium for support; for a SOHO network like yours, you could probably build 2 boxes for the price of 1 Dell. If your motherboard dies though, you'll have a new one on your doorstep the next day vs. having to go out and find one yourself.
 
If I want just storage, I would probably just go QNAP.

I'm just really trying to figure out if running a Windows server on a Dell server would slow down throughput enough so that it wouldn't make sense to try it. I like the idea of moving to a client/server setup and using this need as a reason to check a want off the list, albeit for more money.
 
If you just need a location to store files for individuals, I think good brands pre-built NAS or DIY NAS will be fine. Because they are purpose built for File Serving, for good models with solid software, they can make many front-end and background related tasks easy with respect to File Serving.

If you need to integrate full facilities/services/enterprise authentication/complex access control/misc available on Windows environment, Microsoft designs it so that Windows servers and Windows clients co-operate nicely together in many ways. The Windows Small Business Server is a good example. This route has many benefits as well since for some environments eventually you need to provide other things as well, in addition to file serving.
 
I'm not sure exactly what you are looking for, and what specifically you mean as "throughput." If you think your general "network" is slow in terms of throughput, you may consider a better switch or trunking. If you think the computer/NAS is slow and is the bottleneck, than an actual server may be needed, but it sounds like you just storing files and not running a demanding database per say. What beyond storage are you looking for? What specific idea do you have that a "client/server setup" will do, and why specifically do you want it? For example, you want to be able to share/transfer faster because it's taking too long? Are you looking for enterprise services like AD, better controls, etc..?
 
Our current NAS is too slow and may be dying as it is VERY slow. So, for a direct replacement, the QNAP nas is the direction we would be heading.

I was just thinking that if we are going to be shelling out money for a new NAS, would it make sense to take this opportunity to instead get a server in there that could perform the same functionality of a NAS (centralized storage) and also provide more flexibility as far as the other duties it could also handle.

I just want to make sure that the server wouldn't end up being slower that the QNAP as far as read/write times. Again, I'm thinking a lower end server like a T410 with 4 7200RPM drives in RAID10.
 
More than likely, a decently built server will be better than a stand alone NAS, but it can do a lot more than fileserve if you design it to be. As far as the "provide more flexibility as far as the other duties it could also handle," unless you know what the functions are, and how to implement them, you are looking at a consultant or VAR to do the work for you; this is going to cost money. Also, the default Dell T410 is $5k while a QNAP costs $500 to $1k?

I understand what you mean as you are going to spend money anyways, but are you really interested in "shelling out" 5-10x more for just hardware and pay upward of ten(s) of thousand(s) for someone to set up your server, administrate, and maintain it for you? All of this for a small SOHO with 10 workstations and/or workers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top