ClioSport.net

Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.

NAS Drives



Hi all,

I've an old PC running in the garage with TrueNAS running for the sole purpose of having a Plex server.

I'd started it off with some HDDs I had knocking about and 2 of the 3 have subsequently failed this last week. I've got it temporarily running on 1 drive for now with limited data on it, but will be looking to get some new drives purchased.

Is there any reason to go for HDDs or SSDs these days, especially as cost can be pretty comparable. I know you can but NAS grade HDDs which are designed to be running 24/7 but are they more forgiving when failing as opposed to an SSD?

Thanks
 

DaveL485

ClioSport Club Member
  21T, 9T, Meglio, V6
I had a desktop with a number of drives plugged in with SATA and then a stack of USB3 externals, I think I got up to about 20Tb total, however I had a couple of failures and then backing up was a pain in the ass (manual copying), so I bit the bullet and bought a proper NAS box... I went for a 4-bay synology with 16tb drives running RAID1 (Mirrored disks). I was tempted by the dark magic that is RAID5 (Striped disks with distributed parity) which can fully back up 4Tb with 6Tb of storage (I know right, what the f**k) but I was running an 8tb drive with no backup so I just wanted to get up and running ASAP. Can't believe I put this off so long, setup is easy, the user interface is fab, I can access anything on the server from anywhere, and its SO FAST. Plex works and the kids can stream anything they want direct.

I used these:
Seagate Exos X16 16 TB SATA 6Gb/s 256MB Cache 3.5in Hard Drive (ST16000NM001G)

In this Synology DS420J

1696241530339.png
 

The Psychedelic Socialist

ClioSport Club Member
Use a spare SSD as a cache👀
What are you guys using this for that would actually require large amounts of cache on the drives?

I've got a Synology DS414 sat on the network that comfortably saturates a gigabit link using WD Red drives (64MB cache).

Even that only happens when I'm transferring large files. Most of the time it's used for streaming video across the network (which needs a fraction of the bandwidth) or the occasional bursty transfer that barely fills the RAM of the Synology itself.
 

Crayola

ClioSport Club Member
What are you guys using this for that would actually require large amounts of cache on the drives?

I've got a Synology DS414 sat on the network that comfortably saturates a gigabit link using WD Red drives (64MB cache).

Even that only happens when I'm transferring large files. Most of the time it's used for streaming video across the network (which needs a fraction of the bandwidth) or the occasional bursty transfer that barely fills the RAM of the Synology itself.
I'm not, it's just an easy way of getting around things if you need a cache. An SSD is cheaper than buying more expensive drives with a larger cache
 

The Psychedelic Socialist

ClioSport Club Member
I'm not, it's just an easy way of getting around things if you need a cache. An SSD is cheaper than buying more expensive drives with a larger cache
I was just confused / interested to know what people are doing on their home networks that means they need drives with a larger cache in the first place.

I've had various NAS systems at home for over 20 years now and with my usage I've never felt performance limited.
 


Top