RAID + Periodic backup?

[Potato]

Hi all,
I know RAID is not considered backup, so has anyone set up a RAID system that includes periodic backup (triple redundancy)? Or a system where a drive is mirrored with another periodically, similar to RAID, but only one drive is normally in use and the other is for backup?

I'm looking for a way to safely store large amounts of data (photos, video, important engineering data) while having access to in every once and a while. Not performance driven... not heavy on usage either.

 

[Dangman]

Hi all,
I know RAID is not considered backup, so has anyone set up a RAID system that includes periodic backup (triple redundancy)?

If you're talking about backing up to a NAS, external hard drive, file server, cloud storage, or any other medium that's not part of the actual PC and not to another drive in the same PC, then yes that is done quite often.

Or a system where a drive is mirrored with another periodically (similar to RAID, but only one drive is normally in use. The other is for backup)?

That's not backup if the two drives are still in the same PC.

 

[Potato]

It's okay that they are on the same PC... I mostly want to protect against hard drive failures. I'd like something that's fault tolerant of more than one drive failure... so what do you think of having two PCs, one is RAID 1 mirrored, the other consists only of single drives and the RAID 1 mirrored drive periodically backs up to the other single drive? I only have a basic understanding of these systems; I haven't setup a RAID or a backup system before.
What I'd like is just something that manages multiple hard drives and also backs it up in some manner automatically. That way I don't have to shuffle data around; I can just dump it into this one big drive and not worry about losing that data.

 

[Krazypoloc]

It's okay that they are on the same PC. I mostly want to protect against hard drive failures.

Again thats not backup, so make sure you know the difference. If its critical data you are trying to keep safe you will want to do RAID as well as backup. Best case you would do RAID+External Drive Offsite+Cloud Backup.

RAID, be it software or hardware con protect from hardware failure if thats all you are looking for. Most operating systems will do some type of software RAID in some way shape or form.

The best software RAID available right now is ZFS.

EDIT: You ninja edited your post so I will elaborate.
There are RAID systems that do double and triple parity (no data loss with the loss of 2 or 3 drives respectively). In the ZFS world this would be called RAIDz1, RAIDz2, and RAIDz3. Each step is an increase in parity and fault tolerance, so with RAIDz3 you can lose 3 drives without data loss.

If you wanted to do hardware RAID (expensive and not as fast/flexible) it would be RAID5, and RAID6. RAID5 is single parity and RAID6 is dual.

Do some general reading on ZFS and RAID technology.

 

[Dangman]

If you just want to protect against HDD failures only, then I recommend looking at a RAID 6 setup in a single PC if you have a more than 6TB or so data. RAID 6 will survive the death of two hard drives and would fit your "one big drive" ideal.

Now if you want actual backup (i.e your data is actually safer) and protection against HDD failures, then the method you wrote was on the right track but not exactly correct. You will need two PCs but one of those will act as a file server. That file server will be running RAID 6 or any similar RAID type (i.e RAIDz2). The actual PC can run whatever HDD setup you want as long as it is enough storage for your critical data. The actual PC will then periodically backup to that file server. For super critical information, add in an external hard drive that's regularly taken off-site and stored elsewhere and/or cloud storage to the file server/actual PC.

 

[Unknown-One]

If you just want to protect against HDD failures only, then I recommend looking at a RAID 6 setup in a single PC if you have a more than 6TB or so data. RAID 6 will survive the death of two hard drives and would fit your "one big drive" ideal.

I tossed that idea around for a while when I built my new home server, but the costs simply didn't make sense.

I was aiming for 9TB of usable drive space using 3TB drives. RAID 6 requires a total of five 3TB drives, plus a very expensive RAID controller card, in order to do that. Allows for two drives to fail.

Great... except it was cheaper to just buy 6 drives. Use 3x 3TB for storage (9TB usable) and 3x 3TB for backup. Not only was this cheaper, but it can sustain all drives failing, not just two. Also means the server is quieter because it only contains 3 drives instead of 5. Also means I can recover from accidental deletions by restoring data from the backup disks.

I left the option of going RAID open (I've got a free PCIe slot to stick a RAID card in, and I can double the number of hard disks in the case without a problem), but the extra cost of RAID 6 didn't buy me what I wanted.

 

[Dangman]

Well if it works for you, that's cool.

However, if Windows wasn't/isn't a requirement, you don't need to get an expensive RAID controller to do RAID 6. Linux and FreeBSD based OSes are free and generally have far better software RAID engines than the ones included with Windows and most onboard RAID controllers. So RAID 6 does not have to be expensive unless you're have to absolutely use Windows. Plus it seems to me that you have split and manage data spread across three different drives. Thats what I myself do now on my main PC but it looks like the OP wants a solution where everything shows up as one drive. So RAID would be his best bet here. Well, that or Drive Bender, StableBit Drive Pool, SnapRAID.

 

[ToddW2]

Synology 5 bay NAS + 3x5TB setup in RAID6.

Not cheap, but it will get you what you're talking about + more cool features

I did the same thing, but I used 5x2TB since I don't need TONS of space, and watned 5yr warranty drives.

 

[Unknown-One]

However, if Windows wasn't/isn't a requirement, you don't need to get an expensive RAID controller to do RAID 6.

I'd personally never do software RAID (especially not RAID 6) with any operating system. That's me, but the CPU usage and write penalty are not something I want to deal with.

Also means running Linux, which has never worked properly for me in pretty much any capacity...

Linux and FreeBSD based OSes are free and generally have far better software RAID engines than the ones included with Windows and most onboard RAID controllers. So RAID 6 does not have to be expensive unless you're have to absolutely use Windows.

If I did that, I'd set up iSCSI on the Linux box and build a Windows PC to sit next to it. Have to have a Windows machine actually sharing the storage to the network to support things like media center extenders, homegroups, full network permissions, remote access, etc. Comes out far more expensive overall than just using a single Windows box with 5 drives and a RAID 6 card, with no actual upsides for the additional cost or physical space requirements.

Edit: And no, a virtual machine would not work. Windows needs to be the host in order to get direct access to the GPU so it can do real-time transcoding without hitting the CPU hard.

Plus it seems to me that you have split and manage data spread across three different drives. Thats what I myself do now on my main PC but it looks like the OP wants a solution where everything shows up as one drive. So RAID would be his best bet here.

I'd disagree, because...

Well, that or Drive Bender, StableBit Drive Pool, SnapRAID.

Bingo, I can set that up at any time and it'll look and act like one massive drive.

I got creative with the network shares and symlinks, so I didn't need an actual contigious block of storage, but DriveBender is a great option if you do need that.

Note: I've tried all three of the options you listed, and the only one that actually worked as expected on my test rig was DriveBender.

 

[Krazypoloc]

Synology 5 bay NAS + 3x5TB setup in RAID6.

Not cheap, but it will get you what you're talking about + more cool features

I did the same thing, but I used 5x2TB since I don't need TONS of space, and watned 5yr warranty drives.

I wouldn't suggest doing a blackbox OEM NAS to anyone on [H]. White box is always half the price or less with more performance and flexibility and a better OS (Freenas) than that of Blackbox alternatives.

To those suggesting Hardware RAID - Hardware RAID has been dead for years, unless you absolutely have to run Windows as your OS for your server/NAS. And even then I always suggest virtualization, run vSphere as the baremetal OS and run Freenas/Nexenta/Whatever as a virtual machine and do passthrough of your HBA for ZFS. Then run another VM with Windows on it for whatever yo need Windows for.

 

[drescherjm]

That's me, but the CPU usage and write penalty are not something I want to deal with.

Its been over a decade since CPU usage has been a problem on any non windows software raid. For example with a 5 year old core2quad I get 7% CPU usage on a single core with linux software raid6 and that is with a STR of >800 MB/s (using 10 hitachi 2TB 7200 RPM SATA drives from 3+ years ago.).

 

[ToddW2]

I wouldn't suggest doing a blackbox OEM NAS to anyone on [H]. White box is always half the price or less with more performance and flexibility and a better OS (Freenas) than that of Blackbox alternatives.

To those suggesting Hardware RAID - Hardware RAID has been dead for years, unless you absolutely have to run Windows as your OS for your server/NAS. And even then I always suggest virtualization, run vSphere as the baremetal OS and run Freenas/Nexenta/Whatever as a virtual machine and do passthrough of your HBA for ZFS. Then run another VM with Windows on it for whatever yo need Windows for.

You fail to realize that so many people here on [H] and life in general just want to install drives, and go, and not dick-around with a DIY NAS solution. I too had my own NAS setup and ditched to for a pre-made setup.

If I was going to be housing 30gb+ then I'd go back to DIY, but for what I want, and what this guy wants I can't suggest DIY due to the time involved, and potential for much more headache.

There's a lot of guys here on [H] that work with huge arrays for work / biz but at home run pre-made setups for the sake of EASY TO USE and SIMPLE to SETUP, and no wasted time... I just want my data at home, and I want it how I want it, I decided the fun was gone playing around with it, etc...

If you absolutely love installing OS, configuring settings, running an entire other computer you have to deal with, etc.. then by all means go DIY, but if you want plug-n-play then yes I suggest something already done, and out there

 

[Dangman]

I'd personally never do software RAID (especially not RAID 6) with any operating system. That's me, but the CPU usage and write penalty are not something I want to deal with.

As drescherjm pointed out, the CPU usage isn't all that much these days with a modern CPU. As for write penalty, again, with non-windows software RAID, you actually don't see that much of a write penalty.

Also means running Linux, which has never worked properly for me in pretty much any capacity...

That doesn't mean that the OP's experience with Linux will be the same as yours. As counter-anecdote, Linux has worked properly for me in several capacities (as the main OS for my laptop, main file server OS before I got WHS, as a VM, and as a game server).

If I did that, I'd set up iSCSI on the Linux box and build a Windows PC to sit next to it. Have to have a Windows machine actually sharing the storage to the network to support things like media center extenders, homegroups, full network permissions, remote access, etc. Comes out far more expensive overall than just using a single Windows box with 5 drives and a RAID 6 card, with no actual upsides for the additional cost.

Or just do what Krazypoloc said and virtualize it. Run ESXi, create a Windows VM and a Linux VM, etc. Would be far cheaper than what you propose.

I'd disagree, because...

Bingo, I can set that up at any time and it'll look and act like one massive drive.

Fair enough.

As for the other mini-discussion happening, when it comes to ease of use, Synology is really perfect. I've happily recommended Synology products to other [H] members when simplicity is key. Seriously after getting some hands-on time with a Synology NAS, I can honestly say it really is as easy as everyone else makes it out to be.

 

[Unknown-One]

Its been over a decade since CPU usage has been a problem on any non windows software raid.

Not a problem on Windows software RAID either

Beside the point, though. I'd like to keep as much load off the CPU as possible since this box potentially has to handle a LOT of real-time media streaming and transcoding.

The other issue I'd run into with software RAID is I'd run out of ports pretty quickly. Motherboard has 6 ports, 1 of them would be used for the OS (SSD) and the other 5 would be used for 3TB hard disks... So I'd have zero room for expansion without getting a PCIe card anyway.

Or just do what Krazypoloc said and virtualize it. Run ESXi, create a Windows VM and a Linux VM, etc. Would be far cheaper than what you propose.

Already mentioned why a VM was a no-go...

Getting QuickSync or CUVID/CUDA to work inside of a virtual machine (for hardware accelerated encoding / decoding) is not an easy task...

And this is all WAY over the top compared to what I have set up. "Windows installed bare-metal and connected to 3 local disks" somehow transformed into a machine running ESXi + a Linux VM running software RAID + 2 additional drives to get RAID 6 going + and iSCSI connection through the VMNetwork + a Windows virtual machine + a better processor that supports VT-D + more RAM to support comfortably running a hypervisor and Linux guest in addition to the Windows guest...

End result? A more expensive box that can still only handle 2 drives failing and cannot recover from accidental deletion. So I'd still need a full backup (minimum 3 additional drives, on top of the 2 additional ones needed to get RAID 6 going). This is racking up quick... might as well have dished out for the RAID 6 card and been done with it

 

[Dangman]

Not a problem on Windows software RAID either

Beside the point, though. I'd like to keep as much load off the CPU as possible since this box potentially has to handle a LOT of real-time media streaming and transcoding.

The other issue I'd run into with software RAID is I'd run out of ports pretty quickly. Motherboard has 6 ports, 1 of them would be used for the OS (SSD) and the other 5 would be used for 3TB hard disks... So I'd have zero room for expansion without getting a PCIe card anyway.

Wait, are we talking about the OP now or just you? I've been talking about what's best for the OP, not for you. Like I said earlier, if that setup is working fine for you, that's cool. But that setup may not work out for the OP.

Already mentioned why a VM was a no-go...

Which was part of an edit I did not see as I was replying to your post as it was when first posted.

And this is all WAY over the top compared to what I have set up. "Windows installed bare-metal and connected to 3 local disks" somehow transformed into a machine running ESXi + a Linux VM running software RAID + 2 additional drives to get RAID 6 going + and iSCSI connection through the VMNetwork + a Windows virtual machine + a better processor that supports VT-D + more RAM to support comfortably running a hypervisor and Linux guest in addition to the Windows guest...

End result? A more expensive box that can still only handle 2 drives failing and cannot recover from accidental deletion. So I'd still need a full backup (minimum 3 additional drives, on top of the 2 additional ones needed to get RAID 6 going). This is racking up quick... might as well have dished out for the RAID 6 card and been done with it

You're the one who brought up iSCSI and therefore my recommendation for the ESXi setup. In any case, just to be clear, I'm not saying that the above setup is what the OP should go with. But I'm trying to make sure that the OP has all of the facts. This discussion is not about you but about the OP.

 

[Unknown-One]

Wait, are we talking about the OP now or just you?

Was talking about me there, as an example of how suggesting software RAID over hardware RAID can quickly blow up in your face. Complexity and hardware costs can spiral quickly...

No such thing as a free lunch, unfortunately.

IYou're the one who brought up iSCSI and therefore my recommendation for the ESXi setup.

Best way to get the Linux NAS to act like a local disk on the Windows machine, only reason I brought it up.

 

[Krazypoloc]

You fail to realize that so many people here on [H] and life in general just want to install drives, and go, and not dick-around with a DIY NAS solution. I too had my own NAS setup and ditched to for a pre-made setup.

If I was going to be housing 30gb+ then I'd go back to DIY, but for what I want, and what this guy wants I can't suggest DIY due to the time involved, and potential for much more headache.

There's a lot of guys here on [H] that work with huge arrays for work / biz but at home run pre-made setups for the sake of EASY TO USE and SIMPLE to SETUP, and no wasted time... I just want my data at home, and I want it how I want it, I decided the fun was gone playing around with it, etc...

If you absolutely love installing OS, configuring settings, running an entire other computer you have to deal with, etc.. then by all means go DIY, but if you want plug-n-play then yes I suggest something already done, and out there

Yeah I'm one of the guys that works on massive storage backends every day. I see you built your own desktop/workstation. Putting together a DIY NAS is actually much easier than that, and the cost savings for an hour or two of work (roughly 50% less $$$) is well worth it in my book.

Also with modern OS's for NAS devices like FreeNAS they really are as polished and easy to use or more than any OEM solution out there. You also get more timely updates and a way more robust feature set.

I guess my point is you don't have to play around with it, you can get a parts list from someone, put it all together in 30 minutes, configure your settings and never change it again. Heck with FreeNAS you don't even have to install the OS, you download the thumb drive image and write it to your thumb drive, boot from the thumb drive and hit the web interface and you are done. I don't understand how people claim that DIY storage projects are so complex. They really are not, they only seem complex because of the overwhelming wealth of different options you have over this box that doesn't have any interchangeable parts.

 

[ToddW2]

Yeah I'm one of the guys that works on massive storage backends every day. I see you built your own desktop/workstation. Putting together a DIY NAS is actually much easier than that, and the cost savings for an hour or two of work (roughly 50% less $$$) is well worth it in my book.

Also with modern OS's for NAS devices like FreeNAS they really are as polished and easy to use or more than any OEM solution out there. You also get more timely updates and a way more robust feature set.

I guess my point is you don't have to play around with it, you can get a parts list from someone, put it all together in 30 minutes, configure your settings and never change it again. Heck with FreeNAS you don't even have to install the OS, you download the thumb drive image and write it to your thumb drive, boot from the thumb drive and hit the web interface and you are done. I don't understand how people claim that DIY storage projects are so complex. They really are not, they only seem complex because of the overwhelming wealth of different options you have over this box that doesn't have any interchangeable parts.

Sorry, but building ANYTHING custom in life vs. buying pre-made is more of a hassle I highly value my time, and this isn't something I see huge benefits out of if I build another myself.

I've been building systems for around 25 years, and have enough parts to put together my own NAS and unless I had special (or high storage) requirements etc I don't see the point unless you are solely doing it to SAVE MONEY and have endless time. As I said, I just took apart my 'custom' NAS to go with a Synology. I got more than enough $$ selling off-parts to buy the Synology and still have a completely separate PC for whatever else I want to use it for.

To each their own, I can see the benefits of custom vs premade and vice-versa but I`m not sure you can

 

[Krazypoloc]

Sorry, but building ANYTHING custom in life vs. buying pre-made is more of a hassle I highly value my time, and this isn't something I see huge benefits out of if I build another myself.

I've been building systems for around 25 years, and have enough parts to put together my own NAS and unless I had special (or high storage) requirements etc I don't see the point unless you are solely doing it to SAVE MONEY and have endless time. As I said, I just took apart my 'custom' NAS to go with a Synology. I got more than enough $$ selling off-parts to buy the Synology and still have a completely separate PC for whatever else I want to use it for.

To each their own, I can see the benefits of custom vs premade and vice-versa but I`m not sure you can

Sure I can, but the points you made were not valid ones. "EASY TO USE and SIMPLE to SETUP". The modern DIY NAS is certainly both of these things. If I was on any other forum I might be wrong, but this is [H]. There is still the time to configure even an OEM device out of the box. Either you are exaggerating the difficulty and time involved in building one of these, or you are doing it wrong. Because it doesn't take hours and hours to setup and maintain a DIY NAS, for a novice 2 hours tops. For someone active in the technology field under an hour start to finish for an average sized NAS.

I'm glad you have more than enough cash to buy whatever you want, but this is about the OP so I will continue to provide him options to solve his technology needs. You guys that are "just buy an OEM NAS OP, DIY isn't worth your time" need to dial it back. This is [H] after all not Toms Hardware.

 

[ToddW2]

Sure I can, but the points you made were not valid ones. "EASY TO USE and SIMPLE to SETUP". The modern DIY NAS is certainly both of these things. If I was on any other forum I might be wrong, but this is [H]. There is still the time to configure even an OEM device out of the box. Either you are exaggerating the difficulty and time involved in building one of these, or you are doing it wrong. Because it doesn't take hours and hours to setup and maintain a DIY NAS, for a novice 2 hours tops. For someone active in the technology field under an hour start to finish for an average sized NAS.

I'm glad you have more than enough cash to buy whatever you want, but this is about the OP so I will continue to provide him options to solve his technology needs. You guys that are "just buy an OEM NAS OP, DIY isn't worth your time" need to dial it back. This is [H] after all not Toms Hardware.

Sorry, you are the one who stated you would NEVER suggest a non-DIY NAS to anyone on [H] when it's obvious they do fill a need for MANY MANY people. I think it's YOU who needs to dial it back and open your eyes to the wide variety of options out there other than YOUR solution. I never said I provided the ONLY solution, and even said if $ is a huge concern then DIY is cheaper, and an option. However, I hold my ground in that DIY is MUCH more time consuming, and a hassle than ready to use off the shelf system.


You keep failing to see that it may take only 1hr or 2 hours to setup a DIY NAS but you fail to see the time it takes to order each part, wait for each part, put it together and hope no parts are bad, and then decide which OS to run, or which NAS OS to run, or maybe you want to visualize it, or maybe ____. You see the problem is there's not 1 "THIS IS THE BEST AND EASIEST" solution. There's TONS of combos of solutions, and deciding, and researching what is BEST for YOUR situation in a DIY scenario takes a hell of a lot longer than 1-2 hours total that you think. Maybe you know what YOU would do every time but again maybe what's best for YOU isn't best for the OP. He has his options, and he can decide... your whole attitude of DIY is the oNLY way is ridiculous.

Stop acting like your solution is the ONLY one.

 

[Dangman]

You guys that are "just buy an OEM NAS OP, DIY isn't worth your time" need to dial it back. This is [H] after all not Toms Hardware.

Nope. This is [H] after all, not a place of people who like to do HARD things just because it's HARD so that they can show off to their HARD friends so that they can feel HARD inside. In other words, we're smart [H], not dumb jock [H] here.





You would have had a point if some people had said that the OEM NAS is the only option but no one here has said that.

 

[Krazypoloc]

Sorry, you are the one who stated you would NEVER suggest a non-DIY NAS to anyone on [H] when it's obvious they do fill a need for MANY MANY people. I think it's YOU who needs to dial it back and open your eyes to the wide variety of options out there other than YOUR solution. I never said I provided the ONLY solution, and even said if $ is a huge concern then DIY is cheaper, and an option. However, I hold my ground in that DIY is MUCH more time consuming, and a hassle than ready to use off the shelf system.


You keep failing to see that it may take only 1hr or 2 hours to setup a DIY NAS but you fail to see the time it takes to order each part, wait for each part, put it together and hope no parts are bad, and then decide which OS to run, or which NAS OS to run, or maybe you want to visualize it, or maybe ____. You see the problem is there's not 1 "THIS IS THE BEST AND EASIEST" solution. There's TONS of combos of solutions, and deciding, and researching what is BEST for YOUR situation in a DIY scenario takes a hell of a lot longer than 1-2 hours total that you think. Maybe you know what YOU would do every time but again maybe what's best for YOU isn't best for the OP. He has his options, and he can decide... your whole attitude of DIY is the oNLY way is ridiculous.

Stop acting like your solution is the ONLY one.

So you wouldn't do the same research to find the right make and model of OEM then? And do you not have the same threat of DOA from an OEM NAS?

I know full well what time and place an out of the box NAS solution has. Its your normal everyday Joe, or an SMB that doesn't have an onsite tech on staff. I wouldn't think it would be your average user on [H] though. Maybe you guys are getting old.

 

[Krazypoloc]

Nope. This is [H] after all, not a place of people who like to do HARD things just because it's HARD so that they can show off to their HARD friends so that they can feel HARD inside. In other words, we're smart [H], not dumb jock [H] here.





You would have had a point if some people had said that the OEM NAS is the only option but no one here has said that.

Certainly not. I thought we did [H]ard things to get the most bang for our buck, to overclock to get more performance than the stock parts allow. To boldly go where no geek has gone before.

Again OEM NAS's have their place, but I wouldn't think it would be so enthusiastically suggested here. You have to admit, a DIY solution will be faster, more cost effective and flexible.

I don't build things for the sake of building them. I build things to suit my needs as fast and as affordable as I can. The DIY NAS market has boomed in the last year with the ever maturing OS's like FreeNAS and Nexenta. They are becoming real players FreeNAS actually has its own OEM now. They use the same OS as Freenas and also have an HCL if you want to use your own hardware. This takes all of the guesswork out of it.

http://ixsystems.com/truenas

What I'm saying is its not like the old days of hacked together Linux crap that the only person that can operate it is some guy in his parents basement with no pants on.

 

[Dangman]

Certainly not. I thought we did [H]ard things to get the most bang for our buck, to overclock to get more performance than the stock parts allow. To boldly go where no geek has gone before.

Yes and sometimes going with an OEM setup is the [H]ard route when simplicity and ease of use is key.

Again OEM NAS's have their place, but I wouldn't think it would be so enthusiastically suggested here. You have to admit, a DIY solution will be faster, more cost effective and flexible.

The reason why it's being enthusiastically suggested is because [H]isn't 100% full of people who want to do things the [H]ard way. I've been around the forum long enough to know that this forum is still full of newbies who don't want to complicate things when they don't have to. In other words, yes there are lots of everyday joes or at least above average every day joes here.

Yes a DIY solution will generally be faster, more cost-effective (past a certain point), and flexible (again past a certain point). However, you're completely downplaying the fact that a DIY solution would take a bit longer to set up and research than an OEM NAS setup like a Synology. Unlike an actual server, you would only have to research one device whereas a DIY setup would require you to research multiple parts and to see whether or not said multiple parts will work together. Yes for many of us at HardForum it's quite easy to do the research and setup but you have to understand, as stated earlier, not everyone here at [H]ardForum likes to do things the [H]ard way.

Simple as that. Saying that the [H]ard way is the only way is completely unhelpful and ignoring actual reality. It's perfectly fine to recommend the DIY setup but it's not fine to say that it's the only way unless specifically stated by the OP.

As for the old bit, I happen to be in my 20s. Even I can see when a Synology NAS would make sense for some of the users here on the forums.

 

[Krazypoloc]

Yes and sometimes going with an OEM setup is the [H]ard route when simplicity and ease of use is key.

The reason why it's being enthusiastically suggested is because [H]isn't 100% full of people who want to do things the [H]ard way. I've been around the forum long enough to know that this forum is still full of newbies who don't want to complicate things when they don't have to. In other words, yes there are lots of everyday joes or at least above average every day joes here.

Yes a DIY solution will generally be faster, more cost-effective (past a certain point), and flexible (again past a certain point). However, you're completely downplaying the fact that a DIY solution would take a bit longer to set up and research than an OEM NAS setup like a Synology. Unlike an actual server, you would only have to research one device whereas a DIY setup would require you to research multiple parts and to see whether or not said multiple parts will work together. Yes for many of us at HardForum it's quite easy to do the research and setup but you have to understand, as stated earlier, not everyone here at [H]ardForum likes to do things the [H]ard way.

Simple as that. Saying that the [H]ard way is the only way is completely unhelpful and ignoring actual reality. It's perfectly fine to recommend the DIY setup but it's not fine to say that it's the only way unless specifically stated by the OP.

As for the old bit, I happen to be in my 20s. Even I can see when a Synology NAS would make sense for some of the users here on the forums.

I never said its the only way, and its for everyone. But if you have the time, and the ability then why not? If it will be better in every way other than a little more time and effort?

 

[Dangman]

I never said its the only way, and its for everyone.

You never said specifically it was the only way but you were implying that it was when you said the following:

Again OEM NAS's have their place, but I wouldn't think it would be so enthusiastically suggested here.

I know full well what time and place an out of the box NAS solution has. Its your normal everyday Joe, or an SMB that doesn't have an onsite tech on staff. I wouldn't think it would be your average user on [H] though. Maybe you guys are getting old.

Sure I can, but the points you made were not valid ones. "EASY TO USE and SIMPLE to SETUP".

I'm glad you have more than enough cash to buy whatever you want, but this is about the OP so I will continue to provide him options to solve his technology needs. You guys that are "just buy an OEM NAS OP, DIY isn't worth your time" need to dial it back. This is [H] after all not Toms Hardware.

I wouldn't suggest doing a blackbox OEM NAS to anyone on [H].

Now tell me how one would NOT get the impression that you were saying DIY was the only way. Two people in this thread certainly got that impression.

But if you have the time, and the ability then why not? If it will be better in every way other than a little more time and effort?

Because, again since you seem to not be getting it, you're still vastly downplaying the time and effort. Just because one has spare time and the ability to do so does not mean one should do so. That time and effort can be spent doing something else like reading a book, playing games, photography etc.

Out of curiosity, have you ever worked with a Synology NAS before?

In any case, we can already tell the technical level of the OP when he said "I only have a basic understanding of these systems; I haven't setup a RAID or a backup system before." To me, that sounds like he might be a possible candidate for a Synology NAS if he doesn't want to get too involved with this. Though if he really wants to learn, then a DIY setup is a good idea for him. But since he hasn't said anything yet so far....

 

[Krazypoloc]

Just because one has spare time and the ability to do so does not mean one should do so. That time and effort can be spent doing something else like reading a book, playing games, photography etc.

And I'm one sided? Even if you have the time, effort and ability, you shouldn't do it?

Oh whatever I'm done arguing or whatever it is we are doing on the internet in the wee hours of the evening....hopefully the OP will come back and express more of his needs/wants/budget/skillset/time availability/ect.

 

[Krazypoloc]

Out of curiosity, have you ever worked with a Synology NAS before?

Yes I have. They are some of the best NAS units on the market. But you are still really locked down and limited to what you can do with them. Wanna transcode HD video and stream them over your LAN or WAN? Sorry not enough CPU grunt to get the job done.

 

[Silhouette]

It's okay that they are on the same PC... I mostly want to protect against hard drive failures. I'd like something that's fault tolerant of more than one drive failure... so what do you think of having two PCs, one is RAID 1 mirrored, the other consists only of single drives and the RAID 1 mirrored drive periodically backs up to the other single drive? I only have a basic understanding of these systems; I haven't setup a RAID or a backup system before.
What I'd like is just something that manages multiple hard drives and also backs it up in some manner automatically. That way I don't have to shuffle data around; I can just dump it into this one big drive and not worry about losing that data.

There is certainly backup software that will do this. Personally I prefer having two independent backups in addition to the original files if you are dealing with data that you really don't want to lose. This means that you at all times have at least one copy stored on hdds/tapes/dvds/.. that are not in use and disconnected from the electricity, stored in a separate location if possible.

This allows you to update one of your backups without worrying about power spikes or anything else killing all your original files and the backups at the same time.