reliable single-bay NAS instead of 2-bay NAS?

[Rob O'Toole]

I want to get my first NAS. It will be used for music streaming to my SONOS system and also possibly storing pics. Video streaming may be a future option.

I have no interest in RAID and plan on adding a separate USB drive for backups.
Given this, is there any reason to consider a 2-bay NAS?
I am tempted to just buy a good, single drive NAS.

I am thinking a Synology would be more reliable than a WD MyCloud.

I am considering a DS115.

If I decide for 2-bay, I am looking at DS215J or maybe DS213J.

Budget is < $200 before drives.


Thx,
Rob

 

[TonyH]

I want to get my first NAS. It will be used for music streaming to my SONOS system and also possibly storing pics. Video streaming may be a future option.

I have no interest in RAID and plan on adding a separate USB drive for backups.
Given this, is there any reason to consider a 2-bay NAS?
I am tempted to just buy a good, single drive NAS.

I am thinking a Synology would be more reliable than a WD MyCloud.

I am considering a DS115.

If I decide for 2-bay, I am looking at DS215J or maybe DS213J.

Budget is < $200 before drives.


Thx,
Rob

No possibility of future expansion in your plan?

 

[Rob O'Toole]

Not sure. Since this is my first NAS, I don't want to overbuy.
Still deciding.

 

[L&LD]

I recommend 4 bay or higher NAS units (QNAP is my preference).

Why? Bay 1&2 are RAID1 and make the dependability, reliability and availability of the NAS as high as possible. At least part of the os is installed on the first drive in the system. This ensures that if a hdd becomes defective, you'll at least still be able to use the NAS for it's intended purpose (while you're acquiring a new hdd to rebuild that RAID1 array with).

Bays 3&4 are what contain the data and RAID arrays are not recommended (at least not for only 2 available drives). The data drives are backed up to multiple external USB 3.1 enclosures. And very important data can also be backed up hourly/daily/weekly between the two drives too.

The next thing I recommend is at least two LAN ports on the NAS (that is the only way we can interact with it, after all).

WD Red drives (the 3TB models have been very reliable and fast for my customers and myself) or better. Even thought the os or system drives don't need a lot of capacity, I still prefer and recommend to buy the same size/model drives throughout the NAS.

Lastly, the ability to increase the RAM to at least 2GB and preferably 4GB or more is also on my 'required' to recommend list.

What the above does is give an NAS 'box' that can be very reliable and useable for the next dozen years or more, depending on it's role.

I can appreciate that you may not want to overbuy. But there is such a thing as underspending too.

I have not seen one person use a proper NAS less than they thought they would. But I have seen a few buy a second (more powerful) NAS within months of the first because they realized they should have spent more on that first one. At a cost that was much more than a single (more powerful) NAS in the first place.

A single drive NAS is a very, very overpriced USB enclosure, imo. I would keep reading and defining what you really need of an NAS (a device that will last you half a decade easily) and keep saving accordingly.

 

[joegreat]

For mit it's a simple math: 2 = 100% more safe then 1!

PS.: I have 36 TB gross capacity in my home NAS...

 

[sfx2000]

Not sure. Since this is my first NAS, I don't want to overbuy.
Still deciding.

I would suggest going with a 2-bay NAS - mainly for expansion purposes as your needs grow (there's a lot of utility in a NAS) - don't need to populate both bays first, just run a single drive perhaps - and you can add a second drive later...

The cost delta isn't much compared to having to replace a single bay NAS 12 months later...

 

[KenZ71]

IMHO 1 or 2 bays is no better than a PC with shared drives.

 

[stevech]

IMHO 1 or 2 bays is no better than a PC with shared drives.

Agree on 1 drive. Disagree on 2 drives if used as two volumes, not RAID/mirroring

 

[thiggins]

As long as you have backup for the NAS, a single drive NAS is fine. I've used two single drive NASes for years, with one backing up to the other automatically once a day. One of these is a WD MyBook Live (precursor to the WD My Cloud). Aside from the drive light dying years ago, it has been solid as a rock with great remote access.

Please DO make sure you put the NAS (and all your network gear) on a UPS.

 

[thiggins]

IMHO 1 or 2 bays is no better than a PC with shared drives.

A NAS uses a lot less power and takes up less space. Both need to be properly backed up.

 

[htismaqe]

I use a single bay NAS. The only issue that would be solved by having 2 or more bays for me would be my recovery time. If my drive dies, I have to rebuild the OS before I restore data.

Buy based on what you need, don't overspend.

 

[Rob O'Toole]

I think I'll stick with a single bay NAS. My thoughts are as follows ....

* I don't want/need the extra functions of RAID
* since RAID is not a backup, I will get a separate USB HD to backup my NAS. The extra functionality provided by RAID is incremental at best for me
* A single drive will have plenty of storage for me
* the $$ I save (small) sticking with one drive can go towards my backup solution.
* future expansion needs won't likely happen for a few years. By that time, technology choices will be better IMO and I can buy an improved NAS at that time.

 

[htismaqe]

I think you've got a solid plan. Just to give you an idea, I replaced a single-bay Buffalo NAS with a single-bay QNAP last year.

I've had a single-bay SoC NAS since late 2009 and I've had a grand total of about 4 hours of downtime (when I was replacing the Buffalo with QNAP due to disk errors). I've NEVER lost any data, not a single file.

 

[Rob O'Toole]

htismage,
Don't derail the discussion with facts! : )

 

[L&LD]

* future expansion needs won't likely happen for a few years. By that time, technology choices will be better IMO and I can buy an improved NAS at that time.

NAS 'improvements' are small, even over half a decade's worth of waiting (or more).

What will cost you 'big bucks' today will still be usable in 2021 or later, but buying the equivalent NAS in 2021 or later will cost you much more for little extra performance or features (compared to what you can buy today).

An NAS appliance is a fairly stable and mature product for many years. Putting off purchasing a better than good enough model will not give you any effective savings.

Just want to emphasis that an NAS without the first drive or array in an RAID1 configuration will be very frustrating when (not if) that single drive fails. At least part of the os or configuration of the NAS is stored on that first drive/array and if you lose that; a NAS you do not have (even if you have your data safe elsewhere). The point is that you shouldn't depend on a (single) hdd to perform indefinitely. And an NAS is different than a pc in that it is on 24/7 and will be used more than you can image right now.

I am not advocating you spend more than you want today. Just trying to make you fully aware of the choices you're deciding on now that can and will affect your future with the NAS you choose today.

All of your points other than the last one I've quoted I am agreeing with for your situation. Just make sure that that $400 NAS (total, with a decent drive) today isn't better used towards a better $600 to $800 solution that will not require you buying even more expensive NAS hardware in the (often) too near future.

 

[htismaqe]

Just so we're clear, I got my NAS, a drive, a USB3 backup enclosure, AND a backup drive for just under $300.

As for RAID1 and drive failures, it's all about tolerable downtime. I swapped a 1TB drive for a 3TB drive recently and had to basically "start from scratch". Installing the bare 3TB drive, updating the firmware, and restoring my NAS configuration (not data, just the NAS image itself) took less than 30 minutes and restoring critical data took a couple of hours.

It wasn't frustrating at all. Time consuming, yes. But not a show stopper, certainly not when considering a two-bay NAS would have cost twice as much, or more.

 

[L&LD]

Just so we're clear, I got my NAS, a drive, a USB3 backup enclosure, AND a backup drive for just under $300.

As for RAID1 and drive failures, it's all about tolerable downtime. I swapped a 1TB drive for a 3TB drive recently and had to basically "start from scratch". Installing the bare 3TB drive, updating the firmware, and restoring my NAS configuration (not data, just the NAS image itself) took less than 30 minutes and restoring critical data took a couple of hours.

It wasn't frustrating at all. Time consuming, yes. But not a show stopper, certainly not when considering a two-bay NAS would have cost twice as much, or more.

That cost depends on the capacity of drives you bought, of course.

The above example is not about losing a drive though and even 'planned' it still took a good part of an afternoon or morning (if we include shopping for the drive).

How frustrating this may be for someone else is how many times this will actually happen when everything is in 'panic' mode.

I've had customers that had six consecutive hdd die on them in less than a year. Not the norm, but something that is easy to prepare for. If the availability of the NAS and/or the data, or, if the data itself is of very high importance; a two bay or higher NAS in RAID1 is an easy insurance policy that you only need to buy once.

 

[htismaqe]

The above is not about losing a drive but the change was every bit as "catastrophic". The procedure I had to undertake was identical to what would have happened if my OS drive failed. So it's an excellent indicator of what it would be like to lose that drive to a failure.

As for "panic" mode, you're talking about consumers here, not businesses. You're assuming there's an element of panic that is going to be present at all. There isn't. If I lose the drive in my NAS, I pop a new drive in, I restore the OS, and then I restore my data. I have a 3-tier backup strategy so there's no chance of me losing data even if I lose the whole NAS.

There's simply no reason for me to have a larger NAS or RAID1, especially given the cost.

 

[L&LD]

As for "panic" mode, you're talking about consumers here, not businesses. You're assuming there's an element of panic that is going to be present at all. There isn't. If I lose the drive in my NAS, I pop a new drive in, I restore the OS, and then I restore my data.

I agree that for you there is no element of 'panic'. Particularly with your 3-tier backup strategy.

But you or I are not normal consumers either.

 

[Rob O'Toole]

In my case I will be using my NAS for media storage ... music, pics, some video.
My main system has it's own backup system in place.

If my NAS fails, I will not be "off line" at all. I'll just stream internet radio until I can get a new drive and restore my media from backups. It is not a critical cog in the wheel.

I may just get a 2-bay NAS for chuckles and run with one drive for now. The cost difference is small.
A 3TB drive should do quite well for now.