Topic: To NAS or not to NAS? (Read 6428 times)

Frobozz · « **on:** February 23, 2014, 01:58:33 pm »

It's time for a new desktop and that has made me think about storage as well. Currently storage is shared drives on the desktop computer. Wondering now if I should be considering a NAS rather than putting a bunch of storage drives in the new desktop computer and sharing them.

Are there some advantages to a NAS setup? Primary storage and sharing use would be music and with JRiver Media Center, along with being a central storage for documents and pictures and backups and such. I see lots of potential disadvantages. Potentially more difficult management, potentially more network issues I'd need to deal with, possible more noise, and more expensive.

I can make a the desktop reasonably quiet by using a good case, sound deadening, quiet fans, etc. I haven't seen NAS units that are designed for quiet use. The room is dual use for the computers and music listening. So I need the computer gear to be reasonably quiet. Theoretically I could put the NAS in a different room, but I don't currently have any other rooms in the condo wired.

I'm leaning towards just putting a couple of 4TB drives in the desktop and using that as the shared storage rather than a NAS. Unless I can think of a good reason to go with a NAS.

6233638 · « **Reply #1 on:** February 23, 2014, 02:47:15 pm »

Advantages of a NAS:

Hard drive noise is moved outside of the PC, and can be moved to another location than the listening room. (assuming the PC is there)
It's a lower power device that you may be happier leaving on 24/7 unlike a PC.
You can get fire-safe and waterproof NAS devices, which are a good way to protect your data.
They're physically separated from your PC (well, not entirely if you're using a wired connection) which means that if something catastrophic were to happen (power supply blowing up etc.) your data on the NAS might be safe.

Disadvantages:

Even with gigabit ethernet, a NAS is a lot slower than a physical drive inside your PC.
Most NAS devices are a bit of a "black box". If something is going wrong, troubleshooting and recovering data off the drives can be a real headache.
NAS devices are expensive - they can cost more than building a low-power PC to use as a file server.
They often have drives pre-installed, so you don't get to choose what goes in it.
Difficult to scale up if you need more storage.
NAS itself may be louder than the drives inside a PC tower.

astromo · « **Reply #2 on:** February 23, 2014, 03:24:52 pm »

Is RAID a differentiator to mention?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID

I would say it's an advantage that a NAS offers.

[EDIT: I would also say that I've seen a marked improvement of Win8 over Win7 for network transfer speed. In my case the usefulness of my NAS, using that measure anyway, pretty well doubled.]

Frobozz · « **Reply #3 on:** February 23, 2014, 05:58:34 pm »

I don't plan to do any form of RAID. There's no real benefit for home use. I can deal with downtime if I need to restore a drive. I maintain backups of my music and other files on several external USB drives.

An advantage for the NAS is that it would be easier and less wasteful to leave on 24/7. But I tend to leave my desktop on almost all the time anyways.

Currently my music library and video fit on a 3TB drive that is nearly full. Plan is to use 2 or 3 4TB drives which will give me some much needed room.

astromo · « **Reply #4 on:** February 23, 2014, 06:17:06 pm »

If you've got your back up angles covered, focused on audio and not worried about MadVR, ROHQ video then why not go for a low power, fanless case that you leave on continuously?

That's the way I work.

The market has plenty of passively cooled cases, just takes a bit of detective work to find one that suits what you're planning put inside it. I've been happy with HD-Plex but there are others that do the job.

As with many things in life, it all depends.

jmone · « **Reply #5 on:** February 23, 2014, 08:02:53 pm »

If you have a PC that is on most of the time, then just add drives. One less device to buy and manage, and your PC will be a higher performance than any of the cheap NAS produces. I have 30+TB on my main PC and the extra drives don't add to the noise floor.

Frobozz · « **Reply #6 on:** February 23, 2014, 08:08:18 pm »

It does depend. I'm just trying to make a basic plan and figure out options before I dive in an spend a lot of money.

The desktop is my primary computer and needs to be able to handle power user needs (but not any gaming). Big case, i7, SSD, multiple monitors, multiple drives, yet reasonably quiet for what it will be.

After I get the desktop computer figured out the next plan will be a HTPC oriented computer in the living room for the TV and to be able to have some JRiver tunes in the living room. That computer could be fanless or mostly passive.

As of now I can't think of a real good reason to go with a NAS so I'm likely to go with shared storage drives in the desktop. The money for a good NAS will go towards the living room HTPC.

jmone · « **Reply #7 on:** February 23, 2014, 09:00:27 pm »

Makes sense to me.

astromo · « **Reply #8 on:** February 23, 2014, 09:10:28 pm »

There are off the shelf NAS options that offer the potential to go down the HTPC path:
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/multimedia-voip/multimedia-voip-features/31922-can-a-thecus-nas-replace-your-htpc
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/multimedia-voip/multimedia-voip-features/32041-can-a-qnap-nas-replace-your-htpc

A couple of problems with this for me:

MC is not available as an add in module suitable for a commercial NAS. Although, the release of Linux MC brings this concept into the world of possible (audio first, video ... whenever?), I'd expect that it will be some time away, if it ever happens
The HTPC in my home is effectively the primary unit and it has business software loaded. So, I have the option to work away with a big screen to spread out various documents and have MC produced music to help me along. A commercial NAS HTPC doesn't have the usability that familiar old Windows offers for this kind of function, that I know of. It may be technically possible but I'd expect it would not go down well with my significant other (i.e. Low WAF - Wife Acceptance Factor). The way we're set up has the same look and feel of the OS that's used at work.

As it turns out, I've got a commercially available NAS in a back room that can function as an HTPC (refer the links above). I tried it out with XBMC and Plex but it just didn't rock my world and it rated very poorly on the WAF scale. That was the stake through the heart. It performs the functions for which it was intended well, i.e. video store that MC streams over the home network without difficulty and a separate RAID'ified back up of my laboriously ripped music collection (I've got multiple archives on external drives, as well, just in case the absolute worst happens).

Everyone's different. Sounds like you've got a good plan that will work for you. Enjoy planning the HTPC build.

Frobozz · « **Reply #9 on:** February 23, 2014, 09:50:12 pm »

A NAS that could run the MC server would be awesome. Would probably get me to switch to a NAS for storage.

Next thing to think about is a video card for the desktop computer...

6233638 · « **Reply #10 on:** February 24, 2014, 12:15:51 am »

Quote from: astromo on February 23, 2014, 03:24:52 pm

Is RAID a differentiator to mention?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID

I would say it's an advantage that a NAS offers.

I wouldn't say so - there's nothing to prevent you from using RAID inside a PC as well.
But keep in mind that RAID is not a backup solution - it's a precaution against drive failures.

Quote from: Frobozz on February 23, 2014, 05:58:34 pm

An advantage for the NAS is that it would be easier and less wasteful to leave on 24/7. But I tend to leave my desktop on almost all the time anyways.

If your PC is on 24/7 anyway (I find that since using Media Center, mine is on a lot more now too) then adding a NAS would likely increase your power consumption.

Quote from: Frobozz on February 23, 2014, 09:50:12 pm

A NAS that could run the MC server would be awesome.

I agree, that would be pretty great. I'm still not sure that I'd rather have a NAS than build a low power PC though. It just seems a lot more flexible.

InflatableMouse · « **Reply #11 on:** February 24, 2014, 12:47:56 am »

Another disadvantage of a NAS is its very overpriced for the hardware you get. Typically more than $100 average per bay. You'd get 1 or 2GB memory and an Atom-like CPU with hardly any processing power. For example, if you'd want to use some secure download program (usenet), you can't use SSL without your download speed taking a hit because it can't decrypt SSL at full speed (my NAS got stuck on ~4mbps). Another thing that might make it even more expensive is that typically, the disks they have on their compatibility list are more expensive than the cheapest you could get or the disks you'd want.

For $600, you can build your own server, use any disk you like, get 8 or 10 bays, be at least 10 times as fast and get 8 or 16GB of memory. It will use a bit more power. But you'd be running a full blown OS with which you can do whatever you want and not some dumbed down webGUI.

The downside to that is that you probably end up with a medium to full size tower case but it doesn't have to be noisy. My server is tucked away in the attick. There won't be a videocard with fans, CPU will be some dual core pentium (s1150/s1155) so no big fan required there, you just need some air moving over the disks thats all. You'd be putting it together yourself and be spending some time setting it up and learning how to do that (FreeNAS, ZFSGuru, etc).

I'm just giving you another choice, not trying to sell this as a better choice. It's depends on what you want. If you have no desire to build your own server or to learn a new OS (Linux, BSD) than a prebuilt NAS might be a better option but remember you'll be paying a price for that in terms of speed and flexibility.

Frobozz · « **Reply #12 on:** February 24, 2014, 02:31:18 am »

I like options. Which is why I asked the question. Trying to figure out what options there are and where a NAS might fit in those options. And how those options would be with MC.

I can do Linux as an option. And that may be what I start looking at for server style functions. It would be a little bit of a learning curve. I have installed and used Linux, just never as a server and I'm a noob when it comes to server and networking functions. I can certainly learn it. I can practice with the Linux options in a VM to learn it before committing to dedicated hardware for it.

The commercial NAS units are quite expensive. Makes the Linux box solutions look appealing.
I can put a bunch of drives in my Windows desktop for now, then move those drives to a Linux box if/when I find I need more capability.

csimon · « **Reply #13 on:** February 24, 2014, 04:35:33 am »

At the moment, I like NAS's! I have two MC PCs, each one in a small fanless case with SSD. There's just no room for more drives. You can buy a NAS with multiple bays for expansion, if it gets full then replace it with a bigger one, without having to replace the PC. NAS cases are designed for housing multiple drives, general small PC cases aren't, and the headless NAS can be tucked away out of sight and left to its own devices whereas you generally need a PC accessible and needs attending to often because, well, that's the nature of Windows. It also means that any PC or device can access the media files without one PC having to be on all the time. Also, volume formatting seems easier with a NAS - you can choose between RAID formats or JBOD etc and when you buy another disk it just gets added automatically to the storage pool - not sure if Windows will do this out of the box?? [EDIT: Just done some research, Windows can do this with Dynamic Disks and Spanned Volumes (as long as the disks are not USB external ones) and RAID is supported in the BIOS?...]

But I do see the advantages of storage on the PC, i.e. faster (but does that really matter?) and the NAS approach means you need two devices up and running anyway.

An MC server on a NAS would be the ideal - brainpower-free storage management together with an always-on MC server on a low-power machine.

You either need NAS facilities (software and hardware) on an Windows MC server, or an MC server on a NAS!

gauchomigo · « **Reply #14 on:** February 24, 2014, 04:54:27 pm »

I recently switched from using several large external and internal drives for storage, backup, etc, to a NAS.

I'm never going back. First, with a RAID setup, my data is all redundantly secure. Second, both my wife's and my desktops backup to the NAS, and share data stored there. Third, there is no reason ever to buy a desktop with a large or an extra hard drive, since all my storage is network-attached. Fourth, there is no reason for an external backup drive, period. Fifth, all of my media, be it mp3, flac, mkv, avi, blu-ray rips; everything is on the server, and can be retrieved from anywhere in the house; or actually anywhere with an internet connection.

I went with a Synology 4-bay setup. It certainly was not cheap, but their engineering, both hardware and software is elegant. Everything works, and works well.

Castius · « **Reply #15 on:** February 24, 2014, 05:40:38 pm »

When i get a chance I will be building this.
http://pcpartpicker.com/user/Castius/saved/3tIi

I'll be going freeNas or just Linux with zfs. I'd like to go Linux go i can try to run MC eventually.

6233638 · « **Reply #16 on:** February 25, 2014, 01:10:17 am »

Quote from: gauchomigo on February 24, 2014, 04:54:27 pm

I'm never going back. First, with a RAID setup, my data is all redundantly secure.
…
Fourth, there is no reason for an external backup drive, period.

RAID is not a backup solution.

RAID protects you against drive failures - though drives have a tendency of failing close to one another if they were bought together at the same time.

It will not protect you against accidental deletion, viruses, data corruption etc.
If a file is deleted or corrupted on one drive, that gets mirrored to the other one.

If you moved all your media to a NAS and are expecting RAID to protect your files, I strongly suggest that you add another drive as a backup to your system.

Many consumer NAS devices have a USB or eSATA port on the back and can do a scheduled daily or weekly backup.
I would also suggest disconnecting this drive when you are not actively creating a backup - this way nothing that happens to the NAS can affect your backup.

I actually use multiple drives to back up my important files and media, just to be safe.
I have two external drives which are connected at all times. One does an automated daily backup, and the other is doing a constant backup of any changes made to my files every 5 minutes.

I have two drives which are only connected once a week, to do alternating backups.
Drive A does weeks 1 & 3, Drive B does weeks 2 & 4.

You don't need to implement a system like I have - there's just some data I'm really paranoid about losing. But please don't think that your data is protected because it's on a NAS using RAID.

Quote from: gauchomigo on February 24, 2014, 04:54:27 pm

Second, both my wife's and my desktops backup to the NAS, and share data stored there.
…
Fifth, all of my media, be it mp3, flac, mkv, avi, blu-ray rips; everything is on the server, and can be retrieved from anywhere in the house; or actually anywhere with an internet connection.

Yes, this is convenient. But not really any more convenient than a machine that's left on 24/7 with a drive set up as a network share.

Listener · « **Reply #17 on:** February 25, 2014, 11:20:41 am »

Quote from: astromo on February 23, 2014, 06:17:06 pm

If you've got your back up angles covered, focused on audio and not worried about MadVR, ROHQ video then why not go for a low power, fanless case that you leave on continuously?

That's the way I work.

The market has plenty of passively cooled cases, just takes a bit of detective work to find one that suits what you're planning put inside it. I've been happy with HD-Plex but there are others that do the job.

The OP said

"Currently my music library and video fit on a 3TB drive that is nearly full. Plan is to use 2 or 3 4TB drives which will give me some much needed room."

I don't think that your advice applies when there are several 3.5" hard drives in the case.

Listener · « **Reply #18 on:** February 25, 2014, 11:23:43 am »

Quote from: Frobozz on February 23, 2014, 08:08:18 pm

It does depend. I'm just trying to make a basic plan and figure out options before I dive in an spend a lot of money.

The desktop is my primary computer and needs to be able to handle power user needs (but not any gaming). Big case, i7, SSD, multiple monitors, multiple drives, yet reasonably quiet for what it will be.

As of now I can't think of a real good reason to go with a NAS so I'm likely to go with shared storage drives in the desktop. The money for a good NAS will go towards the living room HTPC.

I have considered and rejected using a NAS in my home LAN. Complexity, lower performance and no real benefits for me.

I think that you are smart to consider options in light of your own needs.

astromo · « **Reply #19 on:** February 25, 2014, 05:29:03 pm »

Quote from: Listener on February 25, 2014, 11:20:41 am

Quote from: astromo on February 23, 2014, 06:17:06 pm
If you've got your back up angles covered, focused on audio and not worried about MadVR, ROHQ video then why not go for a low power, fanless case that you leave on continuously?

That's the way I work.

The market has plenty of passively cooled cases, just takes a bit of detective work to find one that suits what you're planning put inside it. I've been happy with HD-Plex but there are others that do the job.

As with many things in life, it all depends.

The OP said

"Currently my music library and video fit on a 3TB drive that is nearly full. Plan is to use 2 or 3 4TB drives which will give me some much needed room."

I don't think that your advice applies when there are several 3.5" hard drives in the case.

This fanless case (H10 Model) can fit 3 x 3.5" HDD straight out of the box:
http://www.hd-plex.com/hdplex-fanless-htpc-case-and-hard-drive-compatibility.html
So there is at least one example of a feasible hardware solution that's commercially available. There are probably others out there, I just haven't needed to look.

Listener · « **Reply #20 on:** February 26, 2014, 11:34:21 am »

Quote from: astromo on February 25, 2014, 05:29:03 pm

The OP said

"Currently my music library and video fit on a 3TB drive that is nearly full. Plan is to use 2 or 3 4TB drives which will give me some much needed room."

I don't think that your advice applies when there are several 3.5" hard drives in the case.

This fanless case (H10 Model) can fit 3 x 3.5" HDD straight out of the box:
http://www.hd-plex.com/hdplex-fanless-htpc-case-and-hard-drive-compatibility.html
So there is at least one example of a feasible hardware solution that's commercially available. There are probably others out there, I just haven't needed to look.

I'm familiar with the HD-plex and other alternatives. Putting 3 3.5" drives in that case might be possible but it might not be wise.

Once you have several 3.5" drives in a case, the heat they produce is comparable to that produced by a low power CPU at low load. In a case with little airflow and no heatsink connected from the drives to the outside, you are asking for trouble.

The PCH (Northbridge) chip and the VRM modules also produce heat and may run hot in conventional motherboard designs. (The PCH chip on one of my Sandy Bridge systems runs 30 degrees C hotter than the CPU chip.) A CPU fan provides airflow over these heat sources as well as cooling the CPU chip.

I've done my homework on passively cooled systems for years and decided to stay with active cooling (for now.) Intel's most recent NUC systems might be useful but Intel is still sticking with a small diameter, high speed fan.

InflatableMouse · « **Reply #21 on:** February 27, 2014, 10:01:46 am »

Contrary to what most people think heat isn't much of a problem for mechanical hard drives. Quickly fluctuating temperatures might be more of a problem but a real problem is too low temperatures. Failures go up dramatically at temperatures below 15 degrees C for instance. People tend to freak out when their drives hit 40 degrees (celcius), but there isn't a real problem even at temperatures over 45 degrees.

Without the fans my drives fluctuate between 40 and 45 degrees, sometimes one of them hit 46. The drive bays have 120mm fans at 600rpm and they are between 36 and 41 degrees. Only 2 disks in the back are now at 44 degrees, because they have been copying data for 6 hours straight today. Their temps have been stable at 44 though.

Reference:
http://static.googleusercontent.com/media/research.google.com/nl//archive/disk_failures.pdf

Frobozz · « **Reply #22 on:** February 28, 2014, 03:15:33 am »

Quote from: Listener on February 25, 2014, 11:23:43 am

I have considered and rejected using a NAS in my home LAN. Complexity, lower performance and no real benefits for me.

I think that you are smart to consider options in light of your own needs.

The complexity and expense don't make it worth it for my needs. I'm also just me, no one else to share the files and library with. If I had a family and others at home to share with then a NAS could be worth the complexity and expense.

The reason for asking this was to figure out what my storage needs would be for my new desktop. If I'm putting all the storage in the desktop computer I'd need a large tower. Otherwise could have gotten by with a smaller tower. So a big tower case it is.

ldoodle · « **Reply #23 on:** March 27, 2014, 10:53:05 am »

DAS? Direct Attached Storage.

Get a couple of 5 or more bay DAS boxes and hang them off your PC using external SAS/SATA.

INTERACT FORUM

Author Topic: To NAS or not to NAS? (Read 6428 times)