QNAP or Synology?

[RaptorWatcher]

I presently have a QNAP 559 Pro II NAS. I need to upgrade to a larger capacity NAS. Specifically an 8 bay model. I have a question for the users.
In comparing Qnap and Synology it appears that the newer Synology NAS's have a hybrid raid mode.

Does QNAP have a similar mechanism to increase RAID volume size but not requiring the same size hard drives?
Is the Synology Hybrid Raid expandable in RAID 10 format?

The NAS is used to backup 5 machines and also for storage. Is will be backed up to either the QNAP 559 ProII or stand alone USB 3 Hard drives.. for now.
In the future it MAY even be used to backup another NAS located at the office via the internet.

 

[KenZ71]

NAS4Free

 

[thiggins]

Synology is the only NAS maker besides Drobo that allows mixing drive capacities in its auto-RAID system.

 

[RaptorWatcher]

Thanks thiggins.
Can you shed light on HOW the Hybrid RAID works.. somewhere I read that it employs a RAID 5 like system but with some alteration I suspect?

 

[stevech]

preaching: RAID is not a backup.

 

[L&LD]

Synology just went down a notch from my previous estimation.

Anything that becomes proprietary and locks you in to a specific vendor is a recipe for disaster. Considering how companies buy themselves back and forth, I think this is almost on purpose. They can claim that the sale is what dropped the support of feature 'x' and if they were still in charge, things would be different.

Synology is the only NAS maker besides Drobo that allows mixing drive capacities in its auto-RAID system.

 

[stevech]

Auto-RAID? meaning Hybrid RAID? It has its place, but I had no need for it. Hybrid RAID is one option with Synology. Others include no-RAID (volume per drive, as I use), and all the popular RAIDn variations. Much like QNAP et al.
Drobo.. I think has flopped of the radar.

 

[thiggins]

Thanks thiggins.
Can you shed light on HOW the Hybrid RAID works.. somewhere I read that it employs a RAID 5 like system but with some alteration I suspect?

This is a paid article (advertisement), but has links to a Synology article explaining further.

http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/nas/nas-howto/32793-how-to-grow-storage-on-demand-the-easy-way

 

[kng]

One of the reasons I was thinking to buy a Synology was the hybrid raid...

 

[L&LD]

Thanks Tim for the article. I'll have to read it later today.

kng, that is a reason to not want to consider the Synology right now, imo.

 

[sfx2000]

Anything that becomes proprietary and locks you in to a specific vendor is a recipe for disaster. Considering how companies buy themselves back and forth, I think this is almost on purpose. They can claim that the sale is what dropped the support of feature 'x' and if they were still in charge, things would be different.

Hmmm... they used to leverage mdadm, which made recovery a bit easier...

I would tend to agree... let's hope that they have options to go back to a more traditional/open approach...

 

[sfx2000]

I presently have a QNAP 559 Pro II NAS. I need to upgrade to a larger capacity NAS. Specifically an 8 bay model. I have a question for the users.
In comparing Qnap and Synology it appears that the newer Synology NAS's have a hybrid raid mode.

Does QNAP have a similar mechanism to increase RAID volume size but not requiring the same size hard drives?

If you're on QNAP now, this is a good reason to stay with them as you're likely pretty familiar with QTS and how things are done there.

And with a RAID set, one pretty much wants to keep the drives the same if at all possible - if one needs to expand/extend, just create a new RAID set, and add it the pool...

With Storage Pools, one gets similar functionality to what Synology is promising with their hyrbid raid thingy..

 

[RMerlin]

Some QNAP models can be extended with an external drive cage. That could be a way to upgrade your existing NAS without having to replace it.

 

[kng]

I just had a look to both interfaces, from my point of view Qnap interface is much nice than the one from Synology

 

[spikehome]

I have 2 qnap509 and one synology 1511.
If i want tot buy a new one im nog sure if i take qnap or synology.
The 509 i got still firmware updates the 1511 is Next year out of updates.
Support is for both good.
Building qualaty is a + for qnap.
Addon packages i think synology had more.
Follow your hart i think.

 

[L&LD]

Some QNAP models can be extended with an external drive cage. That could be a way to upgrade your existing NAS without having to replace it.

Depending on the price of the external drive cage, it is almost better to buy a new NAS instead with more bays and newer hardware.

 

[sfx2000]

Depending on the price of the external drive cage, it is almost better to buy a new NAS instead with more bays and newer hardware.

The capability is there - so much depends on current sunk costs as well...

 

[L&LD]

The capability is there - so much depends on current sunk costs as well...

Sunk costs are called that because they should never be considered again when moving forward.

• All that should be considered is:
• the total cost of adding more drives and the enclosure itself and the life expectancy or expected usefulness of the main unit over that time frame.
• And compare that to the cost of a new and additional NAS unit that may be more fit for the future workloads and offer a secondary functioning unit to handle the load vs. just a single unit to do it all.

The sunk costs are not relevant at all. Except when a restricted and usually artificial budget is guiding your purchase instead of logic and getting the best use of your money over the longest time period is the goal.

 

[stevech]

To me, 'sunk cost' usually has a negative connotation meaning a past expense for little benefit.

 

[L&LD]

To me, 'sunk cost' usually has a negative connotation meaning a past expense for little benefit.

http://skepdic.com/sunkcost.html


Your statement is correct, but not complete when considering what future decisions should or should not be based on that past expense.

Everything is a sunk cost.

What we need to act on is the fact that our future purchase decisions are not necessarily tied to our past purchase expenses.