NAS for 10+ simultaneous connections

[e-dub]

Hi, I am the "computer guy" at our office, and as such I am in charge of running our very basic network. We currently have a XP workstation connected to out network with shared drive that we all work from. This allows me to make multiple backups to external drives very easily. (I am currently using syncback by 2brightsparks for my backups). However, the raid 1 array in the workstation has been acting up recently, and I have be told that it is most likely because the raid is done using software. In fact, this past Monday morning come of the files had errors in them, so I had to revert to my backup from Friday. Luckly we didn't loose any data.

One option I have is to upgrade our raid array in our computer to a hardware raid card and then just continue operating as normal. However, we have been running to the 10 connection limit built into XP about once every month. I'd like to be able to pull data off of individual computers for back up (such as email folders) but right now I can't do it confidently because I know I'll hit the connection limit.

The other option I am looking at is to get a NAS and use it. I have been reading reviews for this last week and I still have a few questions. I am having a hard time finding out information on the connection limit, if any, built into the operating systems. Typically I can find out how many users can be created, but it doesn't ever seem to say how many computers can connect at one time.

So, all I need is a NAS that can connect 10+ computers simultaneously (this will be peak, average will be 5-8) and that will allow me to back up info from other computers onto the NAS as well as back up the data on the NAS itself. I would also like to be able to control permissions. Features like FTP access would be an added bonus, but aren't really necessary.

Just as a note, I am not sure how much of a problem speed will be to me. Our current setup is about 4 years old and we don't have any speed problems at all. We work mainly with CAD files that tend to be 10 mb or less, and most of the data transfer is simply opening and closing files stored on the workstation.

I have looked at the D-link, synology, netgear, buffalo, qnap, etc options, and I am having a hard time finding out which one, if any, will suit my needs. We are small business, and right now the bosses would like to keep costs down. I have priced out repairing/upgrading our current setup at +- $500, so I'd like to the keep the cost of the NAS in that range if possible (although I could probably convince them to spend a bit more if the NAS backup capabilities were significantly better than what we have now).

Sorry for the novel, and if you made it this far thanks for reading, and thanks in advance for any help you can give me!

 

[thiggins]

First, your RAID problem isn't because it's software based. All NASes are "software based". You probably have a dying drive.

I don't think you need a NAS. You don't even need RAID, since you are doing regular backups. You just need a new drive.

BTW, your needs are very basic. Why are you having a hard time figuring out which NAS will meet your needs?

 

[e-dub]

My main concern is that if I get a cheap NAS it will feel slower than what we have now when everyone is connected. I don't want to recommend a solution and implement it only to find out a week or a month down the road that it is too slow for what we need.

I can get the D-link DNS 323 for $160 CAD and then get two 1 TB drives for $100 each, which is what I am leaning towards. However, the main reason I am hesitating is because it has been on the market for a while and I am not sure if I can get better performance for my money if I go with something newer (like the synology DS-209+). Also, as I stated in my first post, I can't find any documentation stating how many simultaneous connections are allowed by each unit (and maybe that is because there is no limit and it is just assumed that people know this). Most will say how many users I can create (64 for both the DNS-323 and the DS-209+), but I am not sure if it's safe to assume that all of the users can connect at one time.

As for the failing drive, last time this error occurred I took the computer into the the computer shop we work with and they couldn't rebuild the array to the failed drive. However, they said they tested the failed drive and it was working fine. Their solution was to put in a new blank harddrive and rebuild the array to that. That makes me think that this problem is going to be a reoccurring issue with this computer, and if I can get a NAS for the same price that will eliminate the 10 connection limit in XP I'd rather go with that.

 

[thiggins]

Linux-based NASes don't have a simultaneous connection limit.

You can easily do some read/write performance tests to your current XP machine and compare against the test results in the NAS Charts.

What is the hardware configuration of your current XP server and are you using 10/100 or Gigabit Ethernet?

 

[e-dub]

Here are the specs for our current XP fileserver:

AMD Athlon(tm) 64 processor
2800+
1.8 GHz, 512 MB of RAM
We have two Seagate 160 GB 7200 sata harddrives. Because our file sizes are not to large this has been enough space so far, but I can see the need to upgrade to larger drives within the next year.

The drives are set up in RAID 0 for data redundancy because there are hundreds of hours put into our drawings, and I'd like this to remain. (I also do separate daily and weekly backups that are stored off site.)

I am assuming we have 10/100 Ethernet, simply because it was all wired about 6 years ago.

 

[thiggins]

You don't really need to worry about NAS performance if you're running 10/100.
Throughput will be limited to 12.5 MB/s, which the DNS- 321/323 comes in just below.

If you're more comfortable with RAID 1, that's fine.

 

[e-dub]

Ok, that's good to know. Thanks for answering my questions, I really appreciate the help.

 

[claykin]

Spend a few more $ and get either the Readynas Duo, QNAP TS-219/239Pro, Synology DS-209/209+II. IMO the Dlink DNS series is a home only product. I would not trust business data to a DNS series NAS.

 

[claykin]

Here are the specs for our current XP fileserver:

AMD Athlon(tm) 64 processor
2800+
1.8 GHz, 512 MB of RAM
We have two Seagate 160 GB 7200 sata harddrives. Because our file sizes are not to large this has been enough space so far, but I can see the need to upgrade to larger drives within the next year.

The drives are set up in RAID 0 for data redundancy because there are hundreds of hours put into our drawings, and I'd like this to remain. (I also do separate daily and weekly backups that are stored off site.)

I am assuming we have 10/100 Ethernet, simply because it was all wired about 6 years ago.

You meant to say RAID 1??

Are you using the onboard Southbridge controller for RAID or do you have a RAID card installed? If so, which motherboard and chipset? Its possible all you need is a new RAID driver or motherboard BIOS. One would like to think your computer tech checked that, but in the real world techs often overlook the obvious...

I would also recommend you do a physical check of your motherboard and look for swollen or exploding capacitors. Back at the time your motherboard was manufactured, Nichicon and Nippon Chemicon had a couple series of caps that failed early. If you see JPCON, JACKCON, LUXON, or TEAPO caps (there's more, these are the troublesome ones I remember) on your motherboard, especially around the CPU slot and RAM slots, you likely have failing caps. See this link to see what an exploded cap looks like:

http://www.badcaps.net/

 

[e-dub]

yes, I did mean to say Raid 1.

The OS on the XP server gave me "stop: c000021a" blue screen error today, so am leaning towards reformatting the drives, getting rid of the raid array, and reinstalling XP on this computer. After that I'll just use it as spare workstation, if we need one. (I will open the box on this computer though before I spend any time reformatting to make sure there are no exploding capacitors. Thats something I wouldn't have though of.) The NAS will take over the file storage duties. The raid is on the motherboard, but I don't really know a whole lot more than that. I was told that purchasing a RAID card would make it much more unlikely to randomly fail, but once the cost of that is taken into account it is basically the same price to just get a inexpensive NAS, especially since it gets rid of the 10 connection limit hardcoded into XP.

Spend a few more $ and get either the Readynas Duo, QNAP TS-219/239Pro, Synology DS-209/209+II. IMO the Dlink DNS series is a home only product. I would not trust business data to a DNS series NAS.

Is there a reason you say that? Does the DNS-323 have a history of failing? I am just asking because I have only heard good things about it, and the only thing the more expensive NASes seem to have is more speed and more features.

 

[claykin]

yes, I did mean to say Raid 1.

The OS on the XP server gave me "stop: c000021a" blue screen error today, so am leaning towards reformatting the drives, getting rid of the raid array, and reinstalling XP on this computer. After that I'll just use it as spare workstation, if we need one. (I will open the box on this computer though before I spend any time reformatting to make sure there are no exploding capacitors. Thats something I wouldn't have though of.) The NAS will take over the file storage duties. The raid is on the motherboard, but I don't really know a whole lot more than that. I was told that purchasing a RAID card would make it much more unlikely to randomly fail, but once the cost of that is taken into account it is basically the same price to just get a inexpensive NAS, especially since it gets rid of the 10 connection limit hardcoded into XP.



Is there a reason you say that? Does the DNS-323 have a history of failing? I am just asking because I have only heard good things about it, and the only thing the more expensive NASes seem to have is more speed and more features.

Have you tried to do a Google search on that stop error? There's plenty to read. You may find a solution.

Opening the case and examining the caps takes 10 minutes. In most cases you don't need to take anything apart to do it. Just have a small flashlight on hand to examine closely.

The DNS series looks like a toy compared to the NAS products I recommended. Plus Dlink has a history of treating it like a toy. They add features, remove them, etc. The Readynas Duo is $199 after rebate. I think thats about $40 more than the DNS series and its a much better NAS with WAY better support.

Visit the Readynas forums and compare to the DLink forums. Netgear's Readynas folks are engaged and help users out on a daily basis. Dlink? Good luck!

 

[00Roush]

yes, I did mean to say Raid 1.

The OS on the XP server gave me "stop: c000021a" blue screen error today, so am leaning towards reformatting the drives, getting rid of the raid array, and reinstalling XP on this computer. After that I'll just use it as spare workstation, if we need one. (I will open the box on this computer though before I spend any time reformatting to make sure there are no exploding capacitors. Thats something I wouldn't have though of.) The NAS will take over the file storage duties. The raid is on the motherboard, but I don't really know a whole lot more than that. I was told that purchasing a RAID card would make it much more unlikely to randomly fail, but once the cost of that is taken into account it is basically the same price to just get a inexpensive NAS, especially since it gets rid of the 10 connection limit hardcoded into XP.



Is there a reason you say that? Does the DNS-323 have a history of failing? I am just asking because I have only heard good things about it, and the only thing the more expensive NASes seem to have is more speed and more features.

Another thing to consider for any server is a good power supply. If your power supply is still whatever came in the case it could possibly be causing blue screens. Just something to consider.

Well as far as horsepower... your current machine looks to already have more than many of the NASes available. Not sure if you have considered it or not but if you used Ubuntu instead of XP you would not have the 10 connection limit. Using Webmin to manage it is fairly simple.

00Roush

 

[e-dub]

Another thing to consider for any server is a good power supply. If your power supply is still whatever came in the case it could possibly be causing blue screens. Just something to consider.

Well as far as horsepower... your current machine looks to already have more than many of the NASes available. Not sure if you have considered it or not but if you used Ubuntu instead of XP you would not have the 10 connection limit. Using Webmin to manage it is fairly simple.

00Roush

i have considered the the ubuntu option, but I really know nothing about it other than that it exists. While I am sure I could learn, all the time I spend learning and setting it up is time that can't be billed to clients, so I would rather try to go with an option that is ready to be used right out of the box.

I'll take a look at the readyNAS products as well. It's good to know about the differences in support between them and D-link.