Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 401 to 450 of 454

Thread: Home NAS

  1. #401
    NVIDIA> AMD Fixture Handruin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    12,571
    Quote Originally Posted by LunarMist View Post
    What is the theory of increasing number of drives vs. % of capacity on max. RAD performance?
    If I have six drives in RAID 6 and add a seventh, will that cause more CPU load from the parity calculations?
    At this point it is about 60% full and would then be about 50% full, but usage will increase in the future.
    There are far too many factors to give a generalized statement on that question. If you're doing mostly large monolithic file transfers, adding more drives could help because you're spreading the load over multiple drives. The parity calculation shouldn't even be noticeable in a healthy array. Are you using software raid or is it done by a raid card? If it's done by a raid card, I wouldn't even worry about going from 6 to 7 drives with regards to parity overhead. I'm running two sets of 10 drives in software raid 6 and it's not even a concern.

  2. #402
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Handruin View Post
    There are far too many factors to give a generalized statement on that question. If you're doing mostly large monolithic file transfers, adding more drives could help because you're spreading the load over multiple drives. The parity calculation shouldn't even be noticeable in a healthy array. Are you using software raid or is it done by a raid card? If it's done by a raid card, I wouldn't even worry about going from 6 to 7 drives with regards to parity overhead. I'm running two sets of 10 drives in software raid 6 and it's not even a concern.
    It is in the Synology with the quad-core Xenon. I suppose it doesn't matter too much.
    --Lunar

  3. #403
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Handruin View Post
    I have no He drives to compare to so I'm unable to give feedback.
    But you do like them and would buy more?
    --Lunar

  4. #404
    Not really a Hairy Aussie
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,795
    Quote Originally Posted by LunarMist View Post
    What is the theory of increasing number of drives vs. % of capacity on max. RAD performance?
    If I have six drives in RAID 6 and add a seventh, will that cause more CPU load from the parity calculations?
    At this point it is about 60% full and would then be about 50% full, but usage will increase in the future.
    Why would more drives cause the parity calculation to be more complex?

  5. #405
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
    Why would more drives cause the parity calculation to be more complex?
    I have no idea. So what are the parameters?
    --Lunar

  6. #406
    Storage? I am Storage! Howell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Chattanooga, TN
    Posts
    4,740
    Quote Originally Posted by LunarMist View Post
    What is the theory of increasing number of drives vs. % of capacity on max. RAD performance?
    If I have six drives in RAID 6 and add a seventh, will that cause more CPU load from the parity calculations?
    At this point it is about 60% full and would then be about 50% full, but usage will increase in the future.
    It would add no more load to parity calculations and would spread the work over more spindles. Win.

  7. #407
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    Thanks. I may do that over the winter.
    --Lunar

  8. #408
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    Synology has a DX1215 expansion unit for the DS3617xs, etc. that connects by a fairly short inifiband cable.
    Does anyone have experience with this type of cable or expanding the NAS? I would create a separate array of lower speed drives so the impact of the external interface is unimportant, but I would like to run a 2m cable between the NAS and expansion box. Thanks.
    --Lunar

  9. #409
    NVIDIA> AMD Fixture Handruin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    12,571
    If it's infiniband the cable might conform to an SFP+ or QSFP+ depending on the speed. Those connection types are a standard and depending on how far you need to run a cable you will have shorter limits using DAC copper cable vs going with fiber optics.

    Can you provide the specs for the Infiniband interface on the DX1215?

  10. #410
    NVIDIA> AMD Fixture Handruin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    12,571
    I tried to look it up and it does not appear to be an SFP+ connection. It's some kind of Infiniband sata x4 cable that I'm unfamiliar with.

  11. #411
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Handruin View Post
    I tried to look it up and it does not appear to be an SFP+ connection. It's some kind of Infiniband sata x4 cable that I'm unfamiliar with.
    It appears to be an SFF-8470, a trapezoidal type of connector. I'm not familiar with it, only SFF-8087 and SFF-8088.
    https://www.servethehome.com/wp-cont...Connectors.jpg
    https://www.servethehome.com/sas-sat...ce-connectors/

    I suppose I can order and take a chance.
    Last edited by Handruin; 01-13-2018 at 12:03 PM.
    --Lunar

  12. #412
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    I found this fanless switch for 10GbE. It has only four SFP+ ports, but noiseless is nice.
    --Lunar

  13. #413
    Not really a Hairy Aussie
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,795
    Quote Originally Posted by LunarMist View Post
    I found this fanless switch for 10GbE. It has only four SFP+ ports, but noiseless is nice.
    MikroTik has one even cheaper (under $150) if you can live with 2 SFP+ ports.

    https://mikrotik.com/product/CSS326-24G-2SplusRM

  14. #414
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    What is the point of two ports for a single user?
    --Lunar

  15. #415
    Not really a Hairy Aussie
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,795
    Quote Originally Posted by LunarMist View Post
    What is the point of two ports for a single user?
    Uh, maybe you only have two 10gb devices.

  16. #416
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
    Uh, maybe you only have two 10gb devices.
    Then what would be the need for a switch? The NAS have GbE ports as well. I'm sure some normal single users would find a use, but it wouldn't work for me.
    Of course in a datacenter the incoming 10GbE is distributed to the groups or individuals of gBE users.
    --Lunar

  17. #417
    NVIDIA> AMD Fixture Handruin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    12,571
    It's useful if you have multiple computers with 1Gb connections that connect to one or two NAS devices with 10Gb connections assuming the NAS is capable of dealing with the IO.

  18. #418
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
    MikroTik has one even cheaper (under $150) if you can live with 2 SFP+ ports.

    https://mikrotik.com/product/CSS326-24G-2SplusRM
    IIRC Coug mentioned that Lithuanian brand a while ago. I cannot find any for sale online in the US.
    --Lunar

  19. #419
    NVIDIA> AMD Fixture Handruin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    12,571
    I found one at Amazon for $132 in like 10 seconds of searching.

  20. #420
    Not really a Hairy Aussie
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,795
    Quote Originally Posted by LunarMist View Post
    Then what would be the need for a switch? The NAS have GbE ports as well.
    Maybe the two systems with 10gb need to talk to each other over a very high bandwidth link and still talk to other systems and you don't want the headache of connecting the two 10gb systems directly to each other and also to a 1gbE switch and have to manage which interface they use for transferring data in every program / protocol.

  21. #421
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    I'm sure there are a lot of possibilities, but I'd rather have more ports. Four would be the least, but eight would be nice for future proofing.
    I really should be buying a new monitor before the NAS updrages.
    --Lunar

  22. #422
    Not really a Hairy Aussie
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,795
    Quote Originally Posted by LunarMist View Post
    I'm sure there are a lot of possibilities, but I'd rather have more ports. Four would be the least, but eight would be nice for future proofing.
    I really should be buying a new monitor before the NAS updrages.
    For me, I only need two SPF+ once I initially go 10gb. The MicroTik would work. Sure, it doesn't have any room for expansion, but it's cheap enough that by the time I need to add a 3rd 10gb computer (not anytime soon) there will likely be other cheap fanless switch options with more SPF+ ports that cost likely less than the TP-Link.

  23. #423
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    I have two computers and two NAS with SFP+ at this point, so the main reason for a switch would be to use more NAS or more computers.
    I'm not sure about the future of that interface.
    --Lunar

  24. #424
    NVIDIA> AMD Fixture Handruin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    12,571
    I doubt you will see SFP+ interface go away any time soon. It's quite versatile by allowing you to select direct attached copper cables or to go to fiber optic for longer distances and improved signal to noise because there is no electrostatic interference. Performance, latency, and power consumption is also better at the receptacle ends when compared to an RJ45 connection type.

  25. #425
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Handruin View Post
    I doubt you will see SFP+ interface go away any time soon. It's quite versatile by allowing you to select direct attached copper cables or to go to fiber optic for longer distances and improved signal to noise because there is no electrostatic interference. Performance, latency, and power consumption is also better at the receptacle ends when compared to an RJ45 connection type.
    Thanks. I decided on the cheap route and added the 5-pack USB to the backup NAS.
    --Lunar

  26. #426
    Fixture ddrueding's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Monterey, CA
    Age
    37
    Posts
    19,208
    Agree on the SFP+, multi-interface cards are cheap enough that with small installs you can bridge between devices and skip switches altogether if you like.
    Work1: i7-8700K@5.1Ghz, 64GB, 512GB 960 Pro, 1080ti
    Home1: i9-7900X@4.5Ghz, 64GB, 512GB 960 Pro, 1080ti
    Home2: i7-7700k@5Ghz, 32GB, 1TB 960 Evo, 2x 1080

  27. #427
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    My brains are exploding trying to find a workaround for the encrypter.
    The eternal QNAP has horrible performance <50MB/sec. with the volume level password. I cannot use something like the Truecrypt since it craps out when larger files are created.
    Is there some other tool, maybe a container that increases size as needed without the requirement to be static?
    --Lunar

  28. #428
    NVIDIA> AMD Fixture Handruin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    12,571
    Quote Originally Posted by LunarMist View Post
    My brains are exploding trying to find a workaround for the encrypter.
    The eternal QNAP has horrible performance <50MB/sec. with the volume level password. I cannot use something like the Truecrypt since it craps out when larger files are created.
    Is there some other tool, maybe a container that increases size as needed without the requirement to be static?
    Sounds like you need a thin-provisioned filesystem that you can extend over time and has been encrypted. I can't help with QNAP devices; I've never used one of their products.

  29. #429
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    I want to pull 5 drives as a group and store them offsite. Maybe the UX was a mistake, but I wanted to make some use of the extra drives.
    The only other option is to use the 5 in the Synology, but then I cannot expand the main array past 7.
    QNAP does not support encrypted folders for some reason, not that it would help in this case.
    --Lunar

  30. #430
    NVIDIA> AMD Fixture Handruin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    12,571
    Are these 5 drives part of some raid set? Are they just JBOD?

    I don't know what you're referring to for the UX being a mistake.

    Buy a larger array or build your own and use a basic filesystem.

    Encrypt the data at the OS level if the array doesn't support it.

  31. #431
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Handruin View Post
    Are these 5 drives part of some raid set? Are they just JBOD?

    I don't know what you're referring to for the UX being a mistake.

    Buy a larger array or build your own and use a basic filesystem.

    Encrypt the data at the OS level if the array doesn't support it.
    It should be RAID 5. The stupid NAS is wimpy for encryption and surprisingly worse on the eternal UX500P.
    --Lunar

  32. #432
    NVIDIA> AMD Fixture Handruin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    12,571
    Is it hardware RAID5 or software? If hardware, you could have a problem if you need to restore the drives from your offsite and can't find the right hardware to connect them to. I'm not surprised the performance is crap.

  33. #433
    Not really a Hairy Aussie
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,795
    Why are you encrypting the thing in the first place? Do you not have physical control of it?

  34. #434
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
    Why are you encrypting the thing in the first place? Do you not have physical control of it?
    Not unless you include UPS or FedeX.
    --Lunar

  35. #435
    Storage is cool DrunkenBastard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    on the floor
    Posts
    602
    Is it within driving/flying range? Send the drives accompanied with a trusted colleague as carry on, chassis checked in.

  36. #436
    Not really a Hairy Aussie
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,795
    Quote Originally Posted by LunarMist View Post
    Not unless you include UPS or FedeX.
    It's pretty hard to help when you speak in riddles and we know 5% of the story.

  37. #437
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
    It's pretty hard to help when you speak in riddles and we know 5% of the story.
    I'm thinking about data losses lately, so I'd like to have a whole set of the most important stuff offsite and updated more regularly.
    --Lunar

  38. #438
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    Is it possible to rotate a whole set of drives in and out of a NAS or will there be a problem with the array that is returned after the other is used? That may be the simplest solution.
    --Lunar

  39. #439
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Handruin View Post
    Is it hardware RAID5 or software? If hardware, you could have a problem if you need to restore the drives from your offsite and can't find the right hardware to connect them to. I'm not surprised the performance is crap.
    That is a good point! For now I'm hoping of course that there is no catastrophe that destroys the home hardware. If necessary then buying some hardware will not be the main issue. Obviously it is not feasible in the long term, but may be fine until the summer of 2020.

    I am working with the Verano Crypt, which has an expansion function. One container is 9TB and is increasing to 14. This is my last attempt without buying additional drives.
    --Lunar

  40. #440
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    The file size limit is around 16TB. I wonder if that is normal for a file on a NAS or something of a QNAP issue? Two 14.2 TB files are not bad though.
    --Lunar

  41. #441
    NVIDIA> AMD Fixture Handruin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    12,571
    Why is it so small of a limit?

  42. #442
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    I don't know. If it is not a QNAP file size limitation then it must be the Verano Crypt or Windows. I only have 64GB of RAM in the computer but that should be enough.
    --Lunar

  43. #443
    Not really a Hairy Aussie
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,795
    Only...

  44. #444
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    It is the Haswell E, late 2014 technology. It still works well for me at 4.4GHz. I've vastly exceeded the
    storage budget over the past 18 months so a new one is out until Win 10.
    --Lunar

  45. #445
    Not really a Hairy Aussie
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,795
    What are you storing?

  46. #446
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
    What are you storing?
    Just normal files of any format. None are more than 30 GB and very few are more than 4095 MB. That is not the issue.
    I have 5x8TB RED drives in the UX-500P, i.e., 28.5 TB usable space. QTS encrypted write performance of the array was absolute crap so I tried to create a crypto container. It tends to fail between 2-4 TB. I found that Verano has an expander, so I started with a small container of theirs and expanded it in increments.
    --Lunar

  47. #447
    Not really a Hairy Aussie
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,795
    You're coming up with 10's of TB per year of data to store on a personal basis? I bet even Merc wasn't downloading that much. Somehow I doubt you are either. You must be shooting an awful lot of HD/UHD (or higher res) video or something.

  48. #448
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
    You're coming up with 10's of TB per year of data to store on a personal basis? I bet even Merc wasn't downloading that much. Somehow I doubt you are either. You must be shooting an awful lot of HD/UHD (or higher res) video or something.
    No, this is the moist important ~24TB of data from the last 20 years.
    --Lunar

  49. #449
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    Quote Originally Posted by CougTek View Post
    The new QNAP TS-1277 1600-16G almost has Mooner's name printed on it. It has been designed to answer his needs.

    2299$, so it's not that expensive for what it is.
    Now we have the 16-bay (8x 3.5") [url=https://www.qnap.com/en/product/ts-1677x]TS-1677X url]after the 12-bay (8x 3.5") was delayed so long.
    --Lunar

  50. #450
    I can't believe I'm a Fixture LunarMist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14,323
    QNAP continues to introduce new models yet many have the stupid 2.5" bays. Since they already have PCIe slots for M.2 adapters, what is the point? I'd rather have more 3.5" bays.
    --Lunar

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •