NAS Storage Recommendations

What is your network connection like to the NAS? If you are on 1gb network, you aren't going to get much more out of it. On the other hand, if you are only using a 1TB drive, upgrading won't be that much money and may not be a bad idea given the age of the current drive along.
 
yeah i'm on a 1Gb network. Standard home setup. Drive age is the main reason i'm considering this. Freenas is reporting bad sectors on one of the drives in my mirror and these things are old. I don't even remember when i bought them. 10 years?
 
I would stick with spinners. I don't think you will see a significant benefit from an SSD. 4tb still seems to be the sweet spot for pricing. Meaning you would generally pay more per TB below that. However, it doesn't really seem like you need that much space. I would definitely replace the drive that is reporting issues.
 
I would just replace the drives with spinners. On a GbE connection you're only going to get ~115MB/Sec transfer anyway which a spinner can handle.
 
Stay on the spinners. Even if you look to bond a couple of NIC ports together you still won't see much of an advantage with SSD's on it if any.
 
Depending on how old your nas is, ssds may not even improve speeds. As an experiment, I put all ssds inside an older Intel SS4200-E and it never went any faster than with 4x 2TB drives in it.
 
SamirD said:
So that was you. (y) Some solid work on that article. :) Worth of being on STH. Between them and storage review, there's some real journalism again.
Click to expand...
Haha yes. I'm relatively new over at STH, and have done mostly SSD reviews, and a pair of the ASRock Ryzen server mobo reviews. But I got to do the SMR comparison benchmarking and found the FreeNAS/ZFS problem, which turned into a whole thing. Was interesting to say the least!
 
Question OP, how many of those 1tb Samsung's are you running in your setup? Looks like 8Tb WD Reds would keep you in the clear, but if you run 3 in ZFS, you get what 14Tb is in usable storage. I assume these are still relatively cheap shucking WD externals. You should also saturate 1GB network (roughly 110MB/s). However if your needs are like 4TB, you might be better off with a refurb server grade 4tb Samsung ssd. Especially if you are doing lots of random seaks and writes, or have a lot of different people hitting the storage.
 
rhansen5_99 said:
Question OP, how many of those 1tb Samsung's are you running in your setup? Looks like 8Tb WD Reds would keep you in the clear, but if you run 3 in ZFS, you get what 14Tb is in usable storage. I assume these are still relatively cheap shucking WD externals. You should also saturate 1GB network (roughly 110MB/s). However if your needs are like 4TB, you might be better off with a refurb server grade 4tb Samsung ssd. Especially if you are doing lots of random seaks and writes, or have a lot of different people hitting the storage.
Click to expand...
I only have 1 in a mirror. My storage needs aren't big but I'd definitely want more storage if i upgraded as i find myself deleting some stuff to stay under 1TB. non one uses this system except me. They are also 7200 RPM drives so I assume If I went to 5400 I can still max 1GB with just me using the system?
 
Well I just have 2x 8Tb reds in storage pool non raid in win 10, but can get like 140 to 180 Mb/s is when copying large files from ssd boot drive, so I think you could saturate gigabit ethernet with one, let alone 2 plus with parity stuff in zfs. I think WD essentials are $130 is at Bestbuy, and get closer to $100 during sales and pretty easy to get out.

That being said if you go lower capacity and get a smr drive like listed in articles above basically once you overflow the drive cache, your reads and writes tank big time. I experienced this with seagate 8Tb backup drives, which prompted me to replace with the WD Reds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top