2 Volume NAS

[swoti]

Hi community,

i´m currently thinking about buying a new NAS. I have about 10TB of data and ran out of space on my old NAS.
I would like to set up a device with two volumes:
1.) The first volume should be something like a productive NAS volume. Here I would like to store images and stuff I want to access via internet and stuff that is changed more often.
2.) The second volume should be something like a "Data grave" (is that an english word?) where I would like to store things like movies and stuff I back up from my PC. here I would like to use the cheaper Seagate Archive v2 drives.

My question is. Do you think that´s a good plan to use two volumes? Would it be better to have to NAS? Is every disk spinning up when I get access to one of the volumes?

I´m currently favoring the Synology 1815+ but maybe there are arguments for a Qnap solution?

Thanks for your input.

Best,
Stefan

 

[stevech]

For years, I've used two volumes so that if the "main" volume's file system becomes corrupt, or human error causes data loss, the auto-backup will keep a copy on the 2nd volume.
Synology's "Time Backup" keeps the last n versions of selected folders/files on my volume 2 as well. It's saved my buns many times when I screw up.

1815 is a big puppy. Wouldn't a 4 bay do?

Good thinking: multiple volumes. RAID is not a backup.

 

[swoti]

Thanks for your posting. Did your NAs always spin up all harddrives or only the drives of the volume you accessed? I think I will need more than 4 drives because I would like to store the Film, Music and Image data from my PC in a Raid 5 with the cheap seagates and therefor I will need about 4 HDD. For the productive volume I would like to use 2 4 or 6TB WD Reds.

 

[sfx2000]

Can have as many volumes as one wants - as volumes are not directly linked to a physical disk... good question about spinning up disks - since I'm running a 4 disk RAID10, any volume on that RAID set would spin up all the drives, but if I had other drives and other volumes, that I can't answer...

Synology is good, so is QNAP - staying with the same vendor does make the migration quite a bit easier.

 

[swoti]

I´m currently using a QNAP NAS but I heard a lot concerning the more intuitive OS of Synology. On the other hand I like the build quality of the trays and I think there is no 6bay NAS from synology.
What I´m trying to understand is if it´s a good choice to use the Seagate Archive HDD for the "Data Grave" and if i should use a Raid for that or better something like single disks which are backuped. I think when I will have to rebuild the RAID with the Seagate that will take forever and is stressing the drives.

 

[sfx2000]

Hmmm... I probably wouldn't use that HDD in a NAS... they're good drives for backup, and I use one for backup (external USB3). It's the slow random write performance that would be a concern in a NAS box.

I would check with the vendor to see if it's on their tested device/compatability list - QNAP keeps their fairly current..

(BTW - QTS 4.2 is around the corner, I've posted a link in the QNAP sub-forum with their simulator so one can test drive it)

 

[swoti]

Ok..I think from the side of costs I will maybe then use 6TB drives. So I think I will go for the following configuration:
1st volume: 2x WD Reds (4 TB or less) in RAID 1 for the "productive" part of the NAS
2nd volume: 4x WD Reds (6TB) in RAID5 for the storage and backupt part

The second volume will then be backuped by my internal drives in the PC or maybe later in a 2 bay RAID 1 NAS.

What do you think about that? Has anybody any suggestions to that project?
Thanks!!

 

[swoti]

No one with a opinion concerning the setup or the hardware?

 

[stevech]

No one with a opinion concerning the setup or the hardware?

That's a lot of TB and a lot of drives. Can't guess what your storage needs are.
I will say that RAID1 with 4TB is hard (slow) to backup. RAID is NOT a backup. Human error and theft are likely you greatest risk.

This must be a video editing, video surveillance, or avid DVD ripper's NAS!