I really wish Synology or Qnap will continue to produce 4 x 2.5" HDD. The way i see it, the larger the HDD capacity, the more files you will lose when a HDD fail. Which are pretty common after 3 years of usage.
I have yet to see a Consumer based NAS that give me a simple to use and peace of mind setup. I have seen the common 2 x 3.5"HDD setup and they both failed. Although it was may be bad luck. The idea of losing 2TB of your files just hurt. Especially with photos and videos you took.
I was hoping the Seagate Backup Plus slim 4TB solution, which is actually a 2TB 2.5" x 2 USB 3.0 external drive allows me to config as RAID 1. But Seagate decide that their "Backup" line isn't going to offer that.
Piece of mind comes from backups. RAID is not a backup. When a drive dies you should lose no data because it is on your backups. More piece of mind comes from having backups at an offsite location.
the problem with the " RAID is not a backup" mantra is that many users who are implementing these raid boxes are currently making do with docs living on the system drive or an ad hoc arrangement of external bus powered drives. Raid at least provides fault tolerance in raid 1, 10, 5 and 6. Besides, offsite backups implies tape storage, which is pretty expensive and slow. Cloud backup of a raid array is the best solution for SOHO users. This is what I am moving to.
"RAID is not a backup" isn't a mantra - it's a fact. If you accidentally delete a file from a RAID, it can be gone forever, short of getting lucky with data recovery techniques. All RAID provides is some combination of speed, uptime, and data integrity. An off-site backup doesn't have to be difficult or expensive. It can be as simple as an external HD stored in a safe deposit box or even just at work or a friend's house.
my point is that we are applying enterprise thinking and practices to SOHO users when we say "raid is not backup". Some of the NAS makers get this and are bundling or allowing hooks for cloud based backup. But given the capacity of even teh cheper models and the price of SS3 or even EBS there is a big hole in the middle. EG: I am not paying what 8TB of backup on S3 or EWB would cost. But in order to have a backup of my 8TB by straight HDD copying, I'll need a smaller array of 2x4TB drives. May as well buy identical models and sync them via the cloud. Well that is in fact what I am doing, but I'm an extreme case. Can't expect every Tom, Dick and Henrietta to buy dual 5 bay NAS, or have a 2nd location with internet access.
If you're using one NAS "live" then that's not backup. If you are using it for just backups then it's backup whether it is RAID or not. If you are using part of the NAS for backups and you are very careful (so that part can't get easily deleted) then it is backup.
If the data is really important then I recommend you don't put it all on one NAS even if it is 4 bay. And also have automated restore tests to confirm that your backups actually work!
And you are right Tom, Dick and Henrietta won't have 8TB of data to backup. They will never need a dual 5 bay NAS. By the time they have 8TB of data to backup, a 2 bay NAS will store more than 8TB ;). If they don't have that much data to backup, having automated backups to a "cloud" provider actually makes sense.
I'm actually setting up a pair of NAS right now that I will sync over the internet. This way I have my nearline storage and an offsite duplicate of the same data. I was going to go with a simple 4 bay model, but decided that I'd rather have raid 6 which kind of necessitates 5 drives. (well you can do it on 4 but whats the point if you are throwing away half your storage for parity). I think I may rope a couple friends into this and see if we can set up a peering arrangement with raids at our respective locations replicating each others data. The tough part of course will be maintaining privacy for files that matter. But for the most part my buddies are just interested in having their video projects living someplace besides a bunch of La Cie ruggeds.
RAID only allows you to keep working when a drive dies. Accidental deletion, virus, whatever and when the file is deleted it is immediately deleted in the entire array. If your NAS supports snapshots that is good but I prefer offline and offsite backups to protect against power surge, tornado, fire, theft.
I don't know anyone doing tape backups at home anymore. Enterprise level tape drives for things like LTO 3TB tapes can be $1000-4000. For $1000 you can buy 6 separate 4TB external hard drives. Backup to those and take them to a friend's house. That's what I do (I only need 2 external drives) I rotate them every other week so if the house burns down I still have my data. Depending on your upload bandwidth cloud backup may or may not make sense. It would take me 3 years to upload all my data. Crashplan will only let you seed your backup with a single 1TB hard drive that you mail to them so that's no good either.
uhm. attach USB drive, do daily/weekly incremental backups to it automatically. the RAID in a two drive setup is to ensure "uptime" not meant as backup. 2TB External USB drive <€70
I really hope that DSM 5.0 has support SSD write caching. Something Synology needs to some catching up on. QNAP has had this feature for some time snow. Also they need to get rid of that aburd requirement that you HAVE to use two drive bays and put the SSD's in RAID0.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
13 Comments
Back to Article
iwod - Sunday, January 12, 2014 - link
I really wish Synology or Qnap will continue to produce 4 x 2.5" HDD. The way i see it, the larger the HDD capacity, the more files you will lose when a HDD fail. Which are pretty common after 3 years of usage.I have yet to see a Consumer based NAS that give me a simple to use and peace of mind setup. I have seen the common 2 x 3.5"HDD setup and they both failed. Although it was may be bad luck. The idea of losing 2TB of your files just hurt. Especially with photos and videos you took.
I was hoping the Seagate Backup Plus slim 4TB solution, which is actually a 2TB 2.5" x 2 USB 3.0 external drive allows me to config as RAID 1. But Seagate decide that their "Backup" line isn't going to offer that.
scottjames_12 - Sunday, January 12, 2014 - link
Sounds like this might be what you are looking for: http://www.anandtech.com/show/7668/gigabyte-at-ces...toonvl - Monday, January 13, 2014 - link
If only it had a network interface the drobo mini would be exactly what you're looking for..Maybe they decide to make one if the future.
bobj3832 - Monday, January 13, 2014 - link
Piece of mind comes from backups. RAID is not a backup. When a drive dies you should lose no data because it is on your backups. More piece of mind comes from having backups at an offsite location.CalaverasGrande - Monday, January 13, 2014 - link
the problem with the " RAID is not a backup" mantra is that many users who are implementing these raid boxes are currently making do with docs living on the system drive or an ad hoc arrangement of external bus powered drives.Raid at least provides fault tolerance in raid 1, 10, 5 and 6.
Besides, offsite backups implies tape storage, which is pretty expensive and slow.
Cloud backup of a raid array is the best solution for SOHO users.
This is what I am moving to.
Maltz - Monday, January 13, 2014 - link
"RAID is not a backup" isn't a mantra - it's a fact. If you accidentally delete a file from a RAID, it can be gone forever, short of getting lucky with data recovery techniques. All RAID provides is some combination of speed, uptime, and data integrity. An off-site backup doesn't have to be difficult or expensive. It can be as simple as an external HD stored in a safe deposit box or even just at work or a friend's house.CalaverasGrande - Monday, January 13, 2014 - link
my point is that we are applying enterprise thinking and practices to SOHO users when we say "raid is not backup". Some of the NAS makers get this and are bundling or allowing hooks for cloud based backup. But given the capacity of even teh cheper models and the price of SS3 or even EBS there is a big hole in the middle.EG:
I am not paying what 8TB of backup on S3 or EWB would cost.
But in order to have a backup of my 8TB by straight HDD copying, I'll need a smaller array of 2x4TB drives. May as well buy identical models and sync them via the cloud.
Well that is in fact what I am doing, but I'm an extreme case. Can't expect every Tom, Dick and Henrietta to buy dual 5 bay NAS, or have a 2nd location with internet access.
lyeoh - Tuesday, January 14, 2014 - link
If you're using one NAS "live" then that's not backup. If you are using it for just backups then it's backup whether it is RAID or not. If you are using part of the NAS for backups and you are very careful (so that part can't get easily deleted) then it is backup.If the data is really important then I recommend you don't put it all on one NAS even if it is 4 bay. And also have automated restore tests to confirm that your backups actually work!
And you are right Tom, Dick and Henrietta won't have 8TB of data to backup. They will never need a dual 5 bay NAS. By the time they have 8TB of data to backup, a 2 bay NAS will store more than 8TB ;). If they don't have that much data to backup, having automated backups to a "cloud" provider actually makes sense.
CalaverasGrande - Tuesday, January 28, 2014 - link
I'm actually setting up a pair of NAS right now that I will sync over the internet.This way I have my nearline storage and an offsite duplicate of the same data.
I was going to go with a simple 4 bay model, but decided that I'd rather have raid 6 which kind of necessitates 5 drives. (well you can do it on 4 but whats the point if you are throwing away half your storage for parity).
I think I may rope a couple friends into this and see if we can set up a peering arrangement with raids at our respective locations replicating each others data.
The tough part of course will be maintaining privacy for files that matter.
But for the most part my buddies are just interested in having their video projects living someplace besides a bunch of La Cie ruggeds.
bobj3832 - Monday, January 13, 2014 - link
RAID only allows you to keep working when a drive dies. Accidental deletion, virus, whatever and when the file is deleted it is immediately deleted in the entire array. If your NAS supports snapshots that is good but I prefer offline and offsite backups to protect against power surge, tornado, fire, theft.I don't know anyone doing tape backups at home anymore. Enterprise level tape drives for things like LTO 3TB tapes can be $1000-4000. For $1000 you can buy 6 separate 4TB external hard drives. Backup to those and take them to a friend's house. That's what I do (I only need 2 external drives) I rotate them every other week so if the house burns down I still have my data. Depending on your upload bandwidth cloud backup may or may not make sense. It would take me 3 years to upload all my data. Crashplan will only let you seed your backup with a single 1TB hard drive that you mail to them so that's no good either.
jmke - Tuesday, January 14, 2014 - link
"Besides, offsite backups implies tape storage, which is pretty expensive and slow."rsync to another Synology or Linux machine. No need for tapes
jmke - Tuesday, January 14, 2014 - link
uhm. attach USB drive, do daily/weekly incremental backups to it automatically.the RAID in a two drive setup is to ensure "uptime" not meant as backup.
2TB External USB drive <€70
centosfan - Friday, January 17, 2014 - link
I really hope that DSM 5.0 has support SSD write caching. Something Synology needs to some catching up on. QNAP has had this feature for some time snow. Also they need to get rid of that aburd requirement that you HAVE to use two drive bays and put the SSD's in RAID0.