Support NeoGAF

[RoadDogg]

I'm planning to build a wired network in the home later this year or early next year, so I'm looking at potentially adding a NAS solution to the equation. I think a 2-drive setup in RAID 1 with >=3TB storage would suffice, backing up files/photos/music/video from my PC to share them with other devices on the network. I don't have plans to access these files from outside the home, or at work; I just want to move these files off my PC and external drives, and be able to access them from a central location with my TV or whatever.

At this point I'm almost committed to the DS216j from Synology, but I'm wondering what if anything the plain DS216 does better that warrants the extra $100.

It has a slightfly faster CPU, supports hot swapping drives, and more/better IP Cameras.

https://www.synology.com/en-global/products/compare/DS216/DS216j

For what you are doing, I don't think that warrants the $100.

I've had a 212J for a couple years now and have yet to find a reason to upgrade.

 

[diehard]

Yeah the hot-swappable drives are probably the biggest difference for you. The J uses internally installed drives with screws, the non-J uses screwless trays.

 

[Spike Spiegel]

It has a slightfly faster CPU, supports hot swapping drives, and more/better IP Cameras.

https://www.synology.com/en-global/products/compare/DS216/DS216j

For what you are doing, I don't think that warrants the $100.

I've had a 212J for a couple years now and have yet to find a reason to upgrade.

Yeah the hot-swappable drives are probably the biggest difference for you. The J uses internally installed drives with screws, the non-J uses screwless trays.

Thanks for the advice, I went ahead and ordered the DS216j. That $100 would probably be better invested in the hard drives.

 

[Deleted member 12837]

What is it that you want to do with it?

3 TB Reds are fine but we are approaching the point where larger drives are almost the same $/GB. Look here http://pcpartpicker.com/products/internal-hard-drive/#sort=a7&page=1 and sort by Price/GB. Mostly just stay away from any 7200RPM 3TB drives IMO.

WD Blue's are a fair amount cheaper and depending on how you use your NAS will be fine, and can essentially be "turned into" a Red by using wdidle3 to modify settings like how often the heads are parked.

Time Machine backups and media storage for Kodi (Blu-ray rips of movies and TV shows -- won't be doing any transcoding). Also to facilitate quick sharing of random files between computers at home. Pretty basic stuff.

Thanks for that link, I'll investigate further later tonight.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Time Machine backups and media storage for Kodi (Blu-ray rips of movies and TV shows -- won't be doing any transcoding). Also to facilitate quick sharing of random files between computers at home. Pretty basic stuff.

Thanks for that link, I'll investigate further later tonight.

If you aren't doing any transcoding, then the 416play isn't of any use to you. I'd skip the j series and get the regular. I'd also consider the 916 instead of the 416 for possible expansion in the future especially with untouched blu ray rips.

 

[Aurongel]

I'm looking for a four bay solution to back up my business critical work and maybe provide some good flexibility when it comes to home streaming of stored media.

Initially, I plan to only use two drives in RAID 1 but eventual upgrade by adding two more identical drives to achieve RAID 10 once my capacity needs extend beyond the initial storage limits.

Do any of you have any thoughts on the QNAP TS-453A?
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B017YB7T6U/?tag=neogaf0e-20

 

[diehard]

I'm looking for a four bay solution to back up my business critical work and maybe provide some good flexibility when it comes to home streaming of stored media.

Initially, I plan to only use two drives in RAID 1 but eventual upgrade by adding two more identical drives to achieve RAID 10 once my capacity needs extend beyond the initial storage limits.

Do any of you have any thoughts on the QNAP TS-453A?
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B017YB7T6U/?tag=neogaf0e-20

That QNAP is beast for streaming video and even has built-in HDMI ports, but if business critical backups are on it i would want a self-healing filesystem.

A Synology 416play or DS916+ support btrfs and i would probably recommend those in your scenario.

Time Machine backups and media storage for Kodi (Blu-ray rips of movies and TV shows -- won't be doing any transcoding). Also to facilitate quick sharing of random files between computers at home. Pretty basic stuff.

Thanks for that link, I'll investigate further later tonight.

Either the 416 or the 416j , determine if you need a second NIC and the ability to hot-add drives and either of those will be fine. The J is q decent amount cheaper but lack the above features.

 

[Deleted member 12837]

If you aren't doing any transcoding, then the 416play isn't of any use to you. I'd skip the j series and get the regular. I'd also consider the 916 instead of the 416 for possible expansion in the future especially with untouched blu ray rips.

If I skip the j series it seems like I might as well go with the 916, as it's not that much more expensive than the standard 416 (only $100, vs the $150 jump from 416j to 416). So that's $290 for the 416j vs. $550 for the 916+

If I went with the 916+, is there any reason to pay the extra $50 for 8 GB of RAM vs. 2 GB? What's the NAS need the RAM for, anyway? And then, I mean, at that price point why not just get the 1515? Same price, same expansion options, but 1 extra bay, right?

Seems like Synology does a terrible job of creating clearly differentiated tiers for their devices.

 

[Marty Chinn]

If I skip the j series it seems like I might as well go with the 916, as it's not that much more expensive than the standard 416 (only $100, vs the $150 jump from 416j to 416). So that's $290 for the 416j vs. $550 for the 916+

If I went with the 916+, is there any reason to pay the extra $50 for 8 GB of RAM vs. 2 GB? What's the NAS need the RAM for, anyway? And then, I mean, at that price point why not just get the 1515? Same price, same expansion options, but 1 extra bay, right?

Seems like Synology does a terrible job of creating clearly differentiated tiers for their devices.

RAM will depend on what kind of things you'll want to have installed and running on it. If it's mostly just a file server, you probably don't need to havev more RAM. Also, the RAM is designed to be upgradable yourself so you can always just do it later if it becomes necesssary. Are you sure about the 1515 being the same price as the 916? I thought it was more.

I sort of agree that Synology makes it confusing with how many models they offer, but the one trick I learned early on is you can tell a lot about what the model does in the name alone. The first number is the maximum number of drives the unit can take. The second is the year it came out. After that is any designation to differentiate functionality. So a 416 play is a 4 drive, 2016 model, that allows transcoding. The 916 is a 9 drive, 2016 model. The 1515 is a 15 drive, 2015 model. Otherwise, there isn't a huge amount of differences between the various models. RAM and CPU may change, but the real core differences can be found in just the name.

Getting back to which model fits best, it really depends on what you think you'll need long term and how much expandability you want. Typically the significantly higher drive counts will need an external Synology bay that you'll have to buy in addition in order to expand. So that 916 or 1515 will need the external 5 bay attachment. I believe that goes for $400 to $500. So it isn't cheap to expand past the initial number of bays, but it still does allow you that flexibility in case you need in a couple years. That 1515 unit will need two of those bays compared to one for the 916.

For me, once you factor in drive redundancy, 4 bays feels very limiting which is why I threw out the 916 option as something to consider. The thing though is with more bays, you'll probably want to go for two drive redundancy rather than a single one, and that is something you have to do up front rather than later down the line. So that 4 bay, suddenly becomes only a two drive usable system if you look at the 916 or higher. Just some things to keep in mind. I personally went with an 1815 model which has 2 gigs of RAM if that also helps.

 

[Deleted member 12837]

Are you sure about the 1515 being the same price as the 916? I thought it was more.

Yep.

- DS916+ for $599.00 (with only 2 GB or RAM it's $50 cheaper, though)
- DS1515 for $599.99

There's a DS1515+ for $699.99 but it's unclear what the extra $100 gets you. From reviews, it seems like it allows for a Plex server to run on the NAS while the standard 1515 does not. I have no idea if that's true or not, but it's not a requirement of mine regardless.

o that 916 or 1515 will need the external 5 bay attachment. I believe that goes for $400 to $500. So it isn't cheap to expand past the initial number of bays, but it still does allow you that flexibility in case you need in a couple years. That 1515 unit will need two of those bays compared to one for the 916.

I don't need to purchase those extra bays upfront though, right? If I go with a 9xx or 15xx series, the intention would be to have the option to expand later, not to expand right away.

For me, once you factor in drive redundancy, 4 bays feels very limiting which is why I threw out the 916 option as something to consider. The thing though is with more bays, you'll probably want to go for two drive redundancy rather than a single one, and that is something you have to do up front rather than later down the line.

Yep, that's why I mentioned the 1515, so I could potentially start with 2 drives of redundancy and 9 GB of usable space (with the 3 other drives) without needing to pay any extra to expand up-front with another bay attachment.

Thanks again for the thorough explanations, they're very helpful.

 

[Rookje]

So I got the 416play. I dig it, however there's no easy way to view movies on my TV. It doesn't have an HDMI out, and my TV's DLNA is ancient and doesn't support a lot of file formats (mkv, for example). I only have a PS3 and Plex on it is shoddy. I'm thinking of getting an NVidia Shield, so I could hook that up to my receiver and it could also be a Plex server hooked up to my Synology. I could have it offline unless I'm using it, but transcode through my Synology since I'll just have it online 24/7.

 

[diehard]

Yep.

- DS916+ for $599.00 (with only 2 GB or RAM it's $50 cheaper, though)
- DS1515 for $599.99

There's a DS1515+ for $699.99 but it's unclear what the extra $100 gets you. From reviews, it seems like it allows for a Plex server to run on the NAS while the standard 1515 does not. I have no idea if that's true or not, but it's not a requirement of mine regardless.

The + model has a much better processor and supports BTRFS. For only $99, i would actually highly recommend the +.

 

[davepoobond]

I'm pretty sure whoever is giving you instruction has a fundamentally misunderstanding of what a "NAS" is.

A windows box with hard drives and CIFS is nothing more than a NAS. I give them the benefit of the doubt and just assume they don't want to purchase a dedicated unit for this function.

You could just take a spare PC, put all the drives in it and use something like Drive Bender to pool the drives. Enable CRC and possibly enable 2 copies of all files for some redundancy.. It's super cheap and it should work the same as what you are doing now except .. not as crappy.

You could always ask to build a ZFS based system and then show them what a SAN would cost as an alternative..

I'm trying to find an HA solution for less than $40k

ok, so i started to think about this solution again (sorry to be a bug about it) as it pertains to adding new storage to what i already have. I don't have any spare PCs really to fill up with hard drives in the office, so does it make sense to buy new PCs as I need them, load them with 6-8 drives and then use the drive pooling with the duplication turned on? I don't know if that is "better" than a dedicated NAS box, but I do want to make sure stuff is backed up correctly


just as an aside, i'm terrible with the acronyms you were listing, so i'm not really versed in what the differences between some of those things are. You're all a lot smarter than me in this regard, so I'm trying to learn

 

[The Dutch Slayer]

Done:

i5-4460 @3.20GHz
Gigabyte G1 sniper B5-CF
8Gig DDR3
AMD R9 200
25 TB HD space.
Coolermaster Mastercase 5

 

[diehard]

ok, so i started to think about this solution again (sorry to be a bug about it) as it pertains to adding new storage to what i already have. I don't have any spare PCs really to fill up with hard drives in the office, so does it make sense to buy new PCs as I need them, load them with 6-8 drives and then use the drive pooling with the duplication turned on? I don't know if that is "better" than a dedicated NAS box, but I do want to make sure stuff is backed up correctly


just as an aside, i'm terrible with the acronyms you were listing, so i'm not really versed in what the differences between some of those things are. You're all a lot smarter than me in this regard, so I'm trying to learn

Hey did you ever get help with this or figure it out? Let me know if not.

 

[davepoobond]

Hey did you ever get help with this or figure it out? Let me know if not.

not really, i kinda put it on the back burner with my vacation and stuff


any help/advice is appreciated, though!

 

[diehard]

not really, i kinda put it on the back burner with my vacation and stuff


any help/advice is appreciated, though!

When you say buy new PC's do you mean buy brand new ones?

You want to be able to expand consistently and incrementally, correct?

 

[davepoobond]

When you say buy new PC's do you mean buy brand new ones?

You want to be able to expand consistently and incrementally, correct?

yes, buy brand new ones. they would obviously be on the lower end mechanically, but would have to be able to fit enough drives to make it worth it (6 to 8).

and yes, expanding consistently and incrementally is the idea.

 

[diehard]

yes, buy brand new ones. they would obviously be on the lower end mechanically, but would have to be able to fit enough drives to make it worth it (6 to 8).

and yes, expanding consistently and incrementally is the idea.

As far as i know, the only retail cases from a major vendor that have that many bays are pretty damn expensive. How much would you pay for one of those?

A couple more questions: Do you have access to a rack? Do you have easy access to Server 2012 R2 (maybe a spare license?) Are the new PC's you have access to something you can build?

 

[davepoobond]

As far as i know, the only retail cases from a major vendor that have that many bays are pretty damn expensive. How much would you pay for one of those?

well, my guess is the computer we would get would be at most 500 since we dont really want to use it for much. We could throw a SATA PCI express expansion card in there to add on to the connections. For example there was this computer that has 6 bays on amazon. I'm not saying i would get this one specifically, but just the "idea" of it.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0111MTSZ8/?tag=neogaf0e-20

the expansion card is only about 25 bucks, it has 6 bays total, so that would be 5 extra hard drive spots. It could potentially also have external drives hooked up to it, I suppose.

A couple more questions: Do you have access to a rack? Do you have easy access to Server 2012 R2 (maybe a spare license?) Are the new PC's you have access to something you can build?

we do have a server rack. I do not personally have easy access to the server (it is up a ladder in an attic-area), nor do i have training for it. That's where our current NAS boxes are at. The server does have Windows Server on it, but I couldn't guess what the version is at the moment (none of the IT people are in).

if the theoretical PCs we get need to or can be built for less cost than just getting it pre-built then that is a potential avenue as well. It might be harder to get going and easily/quickly add on to the archive if we have to build each computer, though.



Is it even theoretically sound to go the individual PC route? Actually going through and looking at the numbers for all of it doesnt even seem worthwhile after all.

The other problem is if we just keep getting an infinite amount of the 4-drive NAS boxes I can't imagine our server will have enough physical space for it all either to keep stacking them, if its something like this: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00KXP9RJC/?tag=neogaf0e-20, not to mention I have to manage backing up each individual box on another set of hard drives. I guess doing RAID1 would be the better solution for backups then instead of doing another setting and foregoing "extra" hard drives.

 

[diehard]

Wow so you're having to do this without the help of your IT department? So strange.

In your situation i think one of two options would work best.

1. Buy/Build a PC with enough 3.5'' bays that you think will be enough, if you can't build the PC i could probably help find a retail one with a decent amount of bays. Put Windows 10 (really, keep) on it and enable Storage Spaces. Setup storage spaces across all data drives with Parity enabled. Enable network sharing and create a network share to said Storage Space. An inexpensive Norco rack would be preferable (20 drive case for $300) but if you don't have access to the rack this isn't really an option.

2. Buy a large Synology NAS and use "Synology Hybrid RAID". An 8 Bay DS1815+ runs about $850. The 12 bay version runs about $1300.

Both these options would allow you to expand by 1 drive at a time, with different sized drives (these are the kickers). Both options would have some parity, and both options would be relatively inexpensive and better than what you are currently doing.

There are a couple caveats to any selection , let me know if either of these options sound good or if you are thinking of something else.

 

[Daniel Jackson]

I have a basic NAS, a WD My Cloud (one like this)

It has an USB port, to which I have connected an external HDD (a WD Elements). It's being detected and working fine:

Now I'm wondering:
If I connect a USB hub to that USB port on the NAS, can I then connect two external HDDs that the NAS will both recognize (so they will both show up in explorer)? Or is it limited to just one?

 

[Rur0ni]

Can't say for sure honestly. I was under the impression a certain amount of chaining is allowed, but your overall speeds will be limited to the single port.

 

[FlammableD]

Hey guys, my current setup is hitting its limit, and I'd like to bump it up.

Storage is the main bottleneck right now. I have a single 4TB external drive, which now has about 15GB spare! I'd like to get some safety/parity, but I'm happy to live on the edge, it's only TV. There's nothing that'll break my heart to lose.

The current setup is a first gen Celeron NUC with the 4TB HD plugged in. It's running Windows 10 with Plex.

I have it connected by ethernet to my router. My router then has a ethernet cable running to a switch by my TV which goes to the TV/PS4 etc. I use the TV for the Plex client. I also have an Amazon box downstairs connected to Wireless.

The current setup can handle most 1080p content to the TV, only high quality stuff causes it to stutter. The Amazon box sometimes needs to be transcoded, which the NUC can't handle very well. I never use the two simultaneously.

I'm trying to figure out what to build/buy, and do it as cheaply as possibly. What's the best option?

 

[davepoobond]

Wow so you're having to do this without the help of your IT department? So strange.

In your situation i think one of two options would work best.

1. Buy/Build a PC with enough 3.5'' bays that you think will be enough, if you can't build the PC i could probably help find a retail one with a decent amount of bays. Put Windows 10 (really, keep) on it and enable Storage Spaces. Setup storage spaces across all data drives with Parity enabled. Enable network sharing and create a network share to said Storage Space. An inexpensive Norco rack would be preferable (20 drive case for $300) but if you don't have access to the rack this isn't really an option.

2. Buy a large Synology NAS and use "Synology Hybrid RAID". An 8 Bay DS1815+ runs about $850. The 12 bay version runs about $1300.

Both these options would allow you to expand by 1 drive at a time, with different sized drives (these are the kickers). Both options would have some parity, and both options would be relatively inexpensive and better than what you are currently doing.

There are a couple caveats to any selection , let me know if either of these options sound good or if you are thinking of something else.

Thank you for these suggestions. I'm going to shoot it by the manager and see what he says. Some budgetary issues came up so who knows what they're going to allow now. I didn't even know that racks like the Norco thing existed for such a low price.

 

[davepoobond]

alright so I have more info now.

Wow so you're having to do this without the help of your IT department? So strange.

well, i get "help" from them, they just don't have a solution for me and so it falls on me to figure it out, especially since i'm basically the only one using it. ::tears::. no one is a dedicated IT person here, anyway. (they have other roles they play in the company and we contract out a lot of the work for the IT stuff)

In your situation i think one of two options would work best.

1. Buy/Build a PC with enough 3.5'' bays that you think will be enough, if you can't build the PC i could probably help find a retail one with a decent amount of bays. Put Windows 10 (really, keep) on it and enable Storage Spaces. Setup storage spaces across all data drives with Parity enabled. Enable network sharing and create a network share to said Storage Space. An inexpensive Norco rack would be preferable (20 drive case for $300) but if you don't have access to the rack this isn't really an option.

2. Buy a large Synology NAS and use "Synology Hybrid RAID". An 8 Bay DS1815+ runs about $850. The 12 bay version runs about $1300.

Both these options would allow you to expand by 1 drive at a time, with different sized drives (these are the kickers). Both options would have some parity, and both options would be relatively inexpensive and better than what you are currently doing.

There are a couple caveats to any selection , let me know if either of these options sound good or if you are thinking of something else.

Ok, so with #1, do I need to have a "server" for it to work, or just a server rack? The stipulation with #1 is that we have a server that is going to be retired within the next couple years and is not being replaced.

I don't know if the server rack is staying, leaving, what have you. Can a Norco rack function without an actual server, over a network, and just function with the PC over the network?

When I brought up solution #1, basically my manager said it wasn't going to be a good idea since the server was going to be eliminated. He said its possible that we re-purpose it for storage purposes, but that maintaining it would be a cost in itself and made me not think it was a great idea long term after all if it is required. It basically leads me now to the conclusion that #2 is the only actual option.


With #2, do I still need to figure out an independent backup solution, or will the Synology Hybrid Raid (SHR) be appropriate enough to not have to worry about duplicating everything and storing it elsewhere, such as on external hard drives?


Seemingly I won't be able to consolidate my current storage (approx 34 TB by my last count) since we would then need to get a second NAS probably. I recently calculated our growth, and we add about 1 TB of video normally per month, plus whatever comes in otherwise randomly. If we end up filling up a 12-bay with 4 TB hard drives that should potentially last for a while before having to get another.

 

[Valkyr Junkie]

A RAID is never a replacement for a proper backup solution.

 

[diehard]

Just going to answer some questions without quotes so bare with me.

For a Norco or other rack chassis, you won't need anything other than power and network connections. As long as it has an OS installed on it, there would be nothing to differentiate it from a normal PC other than form factor. The reason to consider an inexpensive server chassis is it simply can have a bunch of HDD bays.

With SHR, you get redundancy but that is not backup. So you can lose a hard drive and put in another and not lose anything. It is not however a backup, you won't be able to recover some old deleted file, and if you ever have a major disaster you can still lose everything. All commercial NAS's come with good backup solutions to be able to transfer to external drives, cloud solutions, or to replicate to a second NAS.

If you are looking for a super simple solution while minimizing up-front cost, grab one of the Synology units and put 4-6TB drives in it that will give you enough space currently. Add new drives and re-balance the RAID as you need more space. Determine if you need backups and approach that as a separate issue.

 

[Rimshot]

I'm just starting to look at a NAS solution and I am standing between the DS216j and the AS1002T. Which would you recommend between them? Specs are kind of the same, but software side, interfaces and such, might vary?

My local store gave me €100 off on ASUSTOR AS-302T so I decided to order it. Hope I did the right thing

Edit again: I se it's a 2013 model... Might remove the order and go with something else newer...

 

[metalmachine]

Hi everyone! I need some recommendations please.

I'm in desperate need of expanding my storage situation at home. I'm looking for a good NAS which will act as storage mainly for media and movies. I have a separate Plex server I built that will do the transcoding and streaming so I don't require the NAS to handle anything but storage and data redundancy.

I'm looking for it to have RAID 5 and room for expansion all at a good price.

 

[Purkake4]

Since this thread kind of exists. What's the skinny on Synology's hardware, does it ever get updated? How often? Do the names/product codes change?

 

[Marty Chinn]

Since this thread kind of exists. What's the skinny on Synology's hardware, does it ever get updated? How often? Do the names/product codes change?

They have a ton of different models that range from consumer, to home and small business, and to full sized business. Each specific line/model gets updated usually around 1 to 3 years. The nice thing is the model numbers will tell you exactly what it is and what year it came out. I have a Synology 1813 which means it takes a maximum of 18 hard drives (10 of them have to come from expansion bays though) and came out in 2013. I believe there's an 1815 model that replaced mine which simply means it's the same thing but came out in 2015. There are some nuances like + models, and so forth, but the core naming convention where the first number half tells you how many drives it can take and the second half being the year is really the main info you need to know.

 

[Purkake4]

They have a ton of different models that range from consumer, to home and small business, and to full sized business. Each specific line/model gets updated usually around 1 to 3 years. The nice thing is the model numbers will tell you exactly what it is and what year it came out. I have a Synology 1813 which means it takes a maximum of 18 hard drives (10 of them have to come from expansion bays though) and came out in 2013. I believe there's an 1815 model that replaced mine which simply means it's the same thing but came out in 2015. There are some nuances like + models, and so forth, but the core naming convention where the first number half tells you how many drives it can take and the second half being the year is really the main info you need to know.

Cheers, that makes sense.

 

[BigWeather]

I was wondering if anyone could point me in the right direction for my (pretty simple) backup / redundancy needs.

I'm simply interested in managing just over a TB (currently) worth of photos, documents, etc. I would like some redundancy (in case one drive craps out) and backup (say weekly) just in case. I'm not interested in streaming media or anything so striping isn't necessary -- in fact, one thing I'd like to avoid is any situation where the solution I go with has a proprietary striping system or anything.

I'm thinking just having two multi-TB drives (2 or 4?) as my redundancy and an additional multi-TB drive of the same size for my backup. I'm not even against manually copying stuff from my machines to the two redundancy drives. In fact, I might even prefer that -- adds an extra buffer from me fat-fingering on my machine and having it automatically reflected on my redundant drives. Software that would keep the two redundant drives in sync and also software that would backup from one of those two drives to my backup drive would be nice, though.

I have a Nighthawk router with a USB 3.0 port or I guess I could go with a WD myCloud or somesuch -- I believe those also have USB ports so I could maybe have one that is the drive I manually move stuff to and software would copy it to the other attached to its USB? Then once a week or so I could attach my backup drive to the router or something and kick off a backup?

Thanks for any advice, I've been needing to do this for years... =/

 

[xptoxyz]

On enclosure failure does anyone know if most brands have file systems that are easy to mount and recover on a PC? I think Synology has a FAQ where they answer this, but haven't found the info for other brands.

Are most on EXT4, which I thin is easily mountable and readable on Linux?

 

[otapnam]

Hey guys I'm looking to get a Nas server going mainly for backing up files videos and photos - not really interested in playing media off of it like Plex or whatever.

Can you recommend the best 4 bay system from qnap or synology? I'm just looking for something that's plug n play that I can depend on. Thanks!

 

[Xisiqomelir]

Can you recommend the best 4 bay system from qnap or synology? I'm just looking for something that's plug n play that I can depend on. Thanks!

So...I know this isn't what you asked, but installing any of FreeNAS/FreeBSD/*Linux is actually a snap. I recommend saving the Benjamins and buying more drives to put into a barebones enclosure.

 

[otapnam]

So...I know this isn't what you asked, but installing any of FreeNAS/FreeBSD/*Linux is actually a snap. I recommend saving the Benjamins and buying more drives to put into a barebones enclosure.

I saw that recent thread but id like to get some info on all in one enclosures

 

[diehard]

Sounds like any of their basic models will be fine for you. The QNAP TS-431+ is $220 on amazon right now, i can't imagine that not being fine for your needs.

 

[fierrotlepou]

So I just bought a 3TB drive and I want to add it to my 2TB NAS drive (Synology 216 play).

Am I fucked? I just saw that I can expand my 2TB drive, but it only takes 2TB of my new 3TB drive.

Edit: found it. I could just add it as a seperate volume, without all the RAID stuff.

 

[Darren870]

Hey guys,

I currently have a qnap 212p with 2x 3tb drives in a raid.

I am looking to upgrade and am thinking of a QNAP TS-251.
Reason for the upgrade is that with the ARM based Qnap 212 It can't transcode videos. I use plex a lot and am always having to convert videos to mp4. Also its slow and flaky with plex.

I don't really do anything else but use it to keep backups of pictures, stream videos with plex and stream music with itunes.

Does anyone have any other suggestions other then the Qnap 251? Also with the 251 it has a 1Gb Diskless Memory for $249 or 4Gb Diskless Memory for $389. Do you think its worth the extra $140 for the extra memory based on my current complaints?

Also I'll likely need new hard drives right? Can't just use my existing ones from my current QNAP?

Cheers

 

[Valkyr Junkie]

The only issue you're having with your current NAS setup is the CPU is too weak? You're not hurting for storage space yet?

I would pass on spending the money on another similar NAS only to make an extremely modest lateral upgrade. From doing some additional digging, this appears to be the CPU in the TS-251

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Celeron+J1800+@+2.41GHz

That isn't going to be fast enough to transcode even 720p video with Plex.

When QNAP and Synology offer video-oriented NAS boxes with hardware transcoding, that is only going to be if you use their video application ecosystem for playback; not something like Plex which is going to be purely CPU-based for transcoding.

Since you aren't in need of more storage or redundancy at the moment, the best thing for you to do would be get an Intel NUC to run as a dedicated Plex Media Server. The i3/i5 CPUs in the new NUCs will blow away the old Celeron in that QNAP box. You won't be saving any money, but you won't be making any performance compromises for your Plex server.

 

[DirtyLarry]

I own 2 Synology Diskstations, The DS211j and the DS214+
I use the 1 Primarily as my media storage and a backup for my Gaming PC.
I use the other as a backup machine for all of my other devices, a few mac laptops, etc.

That is all I really use it for and I know I am not taking full advantage of it all.
I did purchase an IP Camera like a year ago and started researching how to hook it up, and never did. Just seemed like a lot of work and unless I was missing something it seemed as if I had to pay for an additional license for the Synology Surveillance Station software.

So I am looking for recommendations of what else can I be doing with it? Should I try hooking up that camera?

I have checked out the DS apps for when I am on the road and I can get to my files and music. However since I use Google Play for my Music now that was not really necessary.

Or am I using it basically how everyone else does?

TIA, DL

 

[Marty Chinn]

I own 2 Synology Diskstations, The DS211j and the DS214+
I use the 1 Primarily as my media storage and a backup for my Gaming PC.
I use the other as a backup machine for all of my other devices, a few mac laptops, etc.

That is all I really use it for and I know I am not taking full advantage of it all.
I did purchase an IP Camera like a year ago and started researching how to hook it up, and never did. Just seemed like a lot of work and unless I was missing something it seemed as if I had to pay for an additional license for the Synology Surveillance Station software.

So I am looking for recommendations of what else can I be doing with it? Should I try hooking up that camera?

I have checked out the DS apps for when I am on the road and I can get to my files and music. However since I use Google Play for my Music now that was not really necessary.

Or am I using it basically how everyone else does?

TIA, DL

Do you take photos on your phone? Use DS Photo to automatically pull those photos off your phone and store them on your server. I have mine do that and then it backs it up to CrashPlan. It's all done in the background automatically and is nice. I also use DS Note to synchronize shopping lists and other notes between me and my wife.

 

[Darren870]

The only issue you're having with your current NAS setup is the CPU is too weak? You're not hurting for storage space yet?

I would pass on spending the money on another similar NAS only to make an extremely modest lateral upgrade. From doing some additional digging, this appears to be the CPU in the TS-251

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Celeron+J1800+@+2.41GHz

That isn't going to be fast enough to transcode even 720p video with Plex.

When QNAP and Synology offer video-oriented NAS boxes with hardware transcoding, that is only going to be if you use their video application ecosystem for playback; not something like Plex which is going to be purely CPU-based for transcoding.

Since you aren't in need of more storage or redundancy at the moment, the best thing for you to do would be get an Intel NUC to run as a dedicated Plex Media Server. The i3/i5 CPUs in the new NUCs will blow away the old Celeron in that QNAP box. You won't be saving any money, but you won't be making any performance compromises for your Plex server.

Yep, pretty much. Don't have too much problem with space at the moment. Just an issue with the CPU and transcoding/loading videos. Just quite flaky.

The NUC only holds 2TB though. I feel like I would be filling that up pretty fast?

 

[Deleted member 12837]

Yep, pretty much. Don't have too much problem with space at the moment. Just an issue with the CPU and transcoding/loading videos. Just quite flaky.

The NUC only holds 2TB though. I feel like I would be filling that up pretty fast?

You'd leave the videos on you NAS. The NUC's sole purpose would be to run PMS.

 

[Darren870]

You'd leave the videos on you NAS. The NUC's sole purpose would be to run PMS.

Ahh okay, and it wouldn't be a problem? Can still transcode? And fucking load faster (biggest problem)

Right now its just chromecast + plex on my Qnap NAS

 

[Purkake4]

You'd leave the videos on you NAS. The NUC's sole purpose would be to run PMS.

NUC + NAS bois represent.

 

[ArchAngel]

Tomorrow I will finally upgrade my 716+II to 2x4TB WD Red. Never knew I could connect my TV receiver to the NAS and record TV shows directly on it. A year ago I didn't even know that I wanted a NAS, now I can't live without it anymore (phone backups for my whole family, sharing of pics/videos, download over night and at work, record shows etc).

Me in 2020:

 

[Valkyr Junkie]

Ahh okay, and it wouldn't be a problem? Can still transcode? And fucking load faster (biggest problem)

Right now its just chromecast + plex on my Qnap NAS

Yup, as long as the Plex Server and and NAS are connected to each other with a fast link (no reason for them to not be next to each other and connected via gigabit), transcoding will be as fast as it needs to be.