[HN Gopher] The Cheapest NAS
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The Cheapest NAS
        
       Author : henry_flower
       Score  : 123 points
       Date   : 2024-07-03 16:45 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (sigwait.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (sigwait.org)
        
       | leros wrote:
       | That's pretty cool. Fits their use case for sure. I would
       | probably opt to spend a little more for a gigabit port. From what
       | I've seen watching Jeff Geerling, you can setup a pretty
       | reasonable performing NAS on something on these small SBCs.
        
         | geerlingguy wrote:
         | Any of the latest generation Arm SBCs is actually pretty
         | adequate for NAS purposes, especially if that's _all_ you want
         | to run on it.
         | 
         | If you get a Pi 4 or Pi 5, or one of the Rockchip boards with
         | RK3566 or RK3588 (the latter is much more pricey, but can get
         | gigabit-plus speeds), you can either attach a USB hard drive or
         | SSD, or with most of them now you could add on an M.2 drive or
         | an adapter for SATA hard drives/SSDs, and even do RAID over 1
         | Gbps or sometimes 2.5 Gbps with no issue.
         | 
         | Some people choose to run OpenMediaVault (which is fine),
         | though I have my NASes set up using Ansible + ZFS running on
         | bare Debian, as it's simpler for me to manage that way:
         | https://github.com/geerlingguy/arm-nas
         | 
         | I would go with Radxa or maybe Libre Computer if you're not
         | going the Raspberry Pi route, they both have images for their
         | latest boards that are decent, though I almost always have
         | issues with HDMI output, so be prepared to set things up over
         | SSH or serial console.
        
       | Scene_Cast2 wrote:
       | Note that it doesn't look like it has ECC, so make sure to have
       | backups. Fancy file systems like ZFS don't remove the need for
       | ECC.
        
         | risho wrote:
         | been using zfs on my home nas without ecc for well over a
         | decade and never had any problems. i've seen people claiming
         | this since before i started using zfs and it seems so
         | unnecessary for some random home project.
        
           | EvanAnderson wrote:
           | Unless you've verified hashes of your files over time you may
           | be having problems and not realizing it.
        
             | theshrike79 wrote:
             | If a single byte flips in a 4-10GB video file, nobody will
             | ever notice it.
             | 
             | There aren't that many cases where it actually matters.
        
             | loeg wrote:
             | I believe ZFS does periodic checksuming (scrubbing).
        
               | yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
               | Strictly speaking I don't think ZFS itself does, but it
               | is very common for distros to ship a cronjob that runs
               | `zpool scrub` on a schedule (often but not always default
               | enabled).
        
             | ratboy666 wrote:
             | They did mention ZFS, so verified hashes of each file
             | block. I hope they are scrubbing, and have at least one
             | snapshot.
        
               | mmh0000 wrote:
               | ZFS does nothing to protect you against RAM corrupting
               | your data before ZFS sees it. All you'll end up with is a
               | valid checksum of the now bad data.
               | 
               | You can Google more, but, I'll just leave this from the
               | first page of the openZFS manual:
               | Misinformation has been circulated that ZFS data
               | integrity features are somehow worse than those of other
               | filesystems when ECC RAM is not used. This is not the
               | case: all software needs ECC RAM for reliable operation
               | and ZFS is no different from any other filesystem in that
               | regard.[1]
               | 
               | [1] https://openzfs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/introduction
               | .html
        
               | mafro wrote:
               | Why would one snapshot help?
        
             | risho wrote:
             | i've heard people say this, like i said, since before i
             | started using zfs and i've never had an issue with a
             | corrupted file. there's a few things that could be
             | happening: i'm the luckiest person who has ever lived,
             | these bit flip events don't happen nearly as often as
             | people like to pretend they do, or when they do happen they
             | aren't likely to be a big deal.
        
               | EvanAnderson wrote:
               | I have some JPEGs with bit flips. I could tell because
               | they display ugly artifacts at the point of the bit flip.
               | (You can see the kind of artifacts I'm talking about
               | here: https://xn--andreasvlker-cjb.de/2024/02/28/image-
               | formats-bit...)
               | 
               | I'd happened to archive the files to CD-R's incidentally.
               | I was able to compare those archived files to the ones
               | that remained on my file server. There were bit flips
               | randomly in some of the files.
               | 
               | After that happened I started hashing all of my files and
               | comparing hashes when I migrate files during server
               | upgrades. Prior to using ZFS I also periodically verified
               | file hashes with a cheapo Perl script.
        
               | iforgotpassword wrote:
               | If all you have on your Nas is pirated movies, then yes
               | 
               | > when they do happen they aren't likely to be a big
               | deal.
               | 
               | But with more sensitive data it might matter to you. Ram
               | can go bad like hdds can, and without ecc you have no
               | chance of telling. Zfs won't help you here if the bit
               | flip happens in the page cache. The file will corrupt in
               | ram and Zfs will happily calculate a checksum for that
               | corrupted data and store that alongside the file.
        
         | jnovek wrote:
         | > so make sure to have backups
         | 
         | Can you (or someone) suggest a backup scheme? I have a 28TB
         | NAS. Almost everything I've looked into is expensive or
         | intended more for enterprise tier.
         | 
         | Are there options for backup in the "hobbyist" price range?
        
           | Dxtros wrote:
           | if your talking cloud backup Wasabi (which uses S3) is the
           | cheapest i could find it's pay as you go and they don't
           | charge for upload/download. The pay as you go is $6.99 per TB
           | which would be pretty pricey at 28 TB, but it's super cheap
           | for my 4tb NAS.
        
           | vunderba wrote:
           | I have a NAS that has 18 TB effective storage, 36 TB
           | mirrored. It all gets backed up to a B2 back blaze which is
           | about six dollars per terabyte - but I'm currently only using
           | about 8 TB at the moment so it's only about 50 bucks a month.
           | 
           | So this might be on the higher end of the price range if
           | you're using up all 28 TB uncompressed since that's about
           | $168 per month though...
        
           | Dylan16807 wrote:
           | AWS, GCP, and Azure all offer cold storage for about $1 per
           | TB per month. If you want any cheaper you need to build a
           | second NAS.
           | 
           | You could also take the awkward route and add one or two
           | large drives to your desktop, mirror there, and back that up
           | to backblaze (not B2).
           | 
           | The other suggestions you got for hot storage strike me as
           | the wrong way to handle this, if you're considering $80 per
           | year per TB for _backups_ then just make another NAS.
        
             | vunderba wrote:
             | For the OP - be careful with AWS, the closest pricing to
             | one dollar per terabyte is S3 Glacier Deep Archive and
             | you'd be surprised how expensive a full restore can be in
             | the event that you need to do so in terms of restore
             | pricing, egress cost, etc.
             | 
             | Another NAS isn't really a good solution (unless you can
             | place it in a different house) - the goal of a cloud back
             | up is that it's offsite.
        
               | Dylan16807 wrote:
               | While true that it is something to be wary of, if you
               | restore the entire backup at full cost every two years
               | it's still cheaper than B2.
               | 
               | The egress is only super high when you compare to how
               | cheap $1 per month is.
               | 
               | And I bet you can find somewhere offsite for a NAS for
               | free or a tiny fraction of $150/month.
        
               | barnabee wrote:
               | I use Glacier alongside RAID with 4 drives so that I can
               | recover from any single drive failure (which _will_
               | happen) just by swapping in a new drive.
               | 
               | Had this setup ~10 years and have had to replace a drive
               | on two occasions but never needed to restore from
               | Glacier.
               | 
               | At this point even if I do need to do a Glacier restore
               | one day it's still going to work out to be pretty
               | economical.
        
           | criddell wrote:
           | The low-tech and not super resilient method is to buy a
           | second 28TB NAS, put it in a different location and sync them
           | periodically when you know your primary is in good shape.
           | 
           | Back in the days of DVDs, I used to backup my 20GB drive onto
           | DVDs. I wonder if you could do something similar today but
           | instead of a bunch of 4GB optical disks, you would use 4 x
           | 8TB drives?
        
             | jjrh wrote:
             | There is 'amanda'. It will split your data up if and you
             | can rotate a bunch of disks.
             | 
             | Used it years ago, we rotated disks every week or something
             | and periodically would take one out of commission and get a
             | new one.
             | 
             | I believe you can mix and match storage mediums - like have
             | your monthly snapshot write to tape.
        
           | frutiger wrote:
           | `zfs send --raw` of encrypted datasets to
           | https://www.rsync.net/products/zfsintro.html.
        
             | ahofmann wrote:
             | That would cost at least 336 EUR per month.
        
               | mmh0000 wrote:
               | Yeah, rsync.net is pricey, but in reliable.
               | 
               | I been using Interserver[1] + borg[2] for the last 3
               | years. With the 10TB plan comes out to $25/mo, but if you
               | prepay a year there's discounts.
               | 
               | For the OPs use case, they have a 40TB plan for $84/mo.
               | Still pricey, but, cheap compared to most other cloud
               | storages. If you have data you care about, off-site
               | backups are required.
               | 
               | [1] https://www.interserver.net/storage/
               | 
               | [2] https://borgbackup.readthedocs.io/en/stable/
        
           | ssl-3 wrote:
           | A cheap backup scheme:
           | 
           | Buy the hardware to make a lightweight backup server. Make
           | backups work with it. Take it to your friend's place along
           | with a bottle of scotch, plug it in, and then: Use it.
           | 
           | Disaster recovery is easy: Just drive over there.
           | 
           | Redundancy is easy: Build two, and leave them in different
           | places.
           | 
           | None of this needs to happen on rented hardware in The Clown.
        
           | mmh0000 wrote:
           | https://www.interserver.net/storage/
        
           | toast0 wrote:
           | You pretty much need a second, similar system, hopefully not
           | physically nearby. Tape doesn't scale down to home use, and
           | optical is too small.
           | 
           | My home NAS has several roles, so I don't have to backup the
           | full capacity. The family shared drive definitely needs to be
           | backed up. The windows desktop backups probably don't,
           | although if I had a better plan for offsite backups, I would
           | probably include desktop backups in that. TV recordings and
           | ripped optical discs don't need to be backed up for me, I
           | could re-rip them and they're typically commercially
           | available if I had a total loss; not worth the expense to
           | host a copy of that offsite, too; IMHO.
           | 
           | You might do something like mirrored disks on the NAS and
           | single copy on the backup as a cost saver, but that comes
           | with risks too.
        
           | yair99dd wrote:
           | Check Storj distributed storage. Fraction of aws Storage*
           | 
           | $0.004 Per GB/month
        
         | hitsurume wrote:
         | I know ECC is a special type of ram, but how does it help a
         | NAS/Raid setup?
        
           | AlexandrB wrote:
           | Data that's about to be written to disk often resides in ram
           | for some period of time - bit flips in non-ECC ram can
           | silently corrupt the data before writing it out. ZFS doesn't
           | prevent this though it might detect it with checksumming.
           | 
           | https://jrs-s.net/2015/02/03/will-zfs-and-non-ecc-ram-
           | kill-y...
        
           | eric__cartman wrote:
           | If you're unlucky enough to experience memory errors in one
           | of the intermediate buffers files go through while being
           | copied from one computer to another an incorrect copy of the
           | file might get written to disk.
           | 
           | When running software RAID, memory errors could also cause
           | data to be replicated erroneously and raise an error the next
           | time it's read. That said if the memory is flaky enough that
           | these errors are common it's highly likely that the operating
           | system will crash very frequently and the user will know
           | something is seriously wrong.
           | 
           | If you want to make sure that files have been copied
           | correctly you can flush all kernel buffers and run diff -r
           | between the source and destination directory to make sure
           | that everything is the same.
           | 
           | It's probably way more likely to experience data loss due to
           | human error or external factors such as a power surge than
           | bad ram. I personally thoroughly test the memory before a
           | computer gets put into service and assume it's okay until
           | something fails or it gets replaced. The only machine I've
           | ever seen that would corrupt random data on a disk was
           | heavily and carelessly overclocked (teenage me cared about
           | getting moar fps in games, and not having a reliable
           | workstation lol)
        
             | barnabee wrote:
             | I wonder whether something like Syncthing would notice a
             | hash difference with data corruption caused by such a
             | memory error? And whether it'd correct it or propagate the
             | issue...
        
         | theshrike79 wrote:
         | I've had non-ECC NAS systems for over 20 years and I've had
         | exactly zero cases where memory corruption was an issue.
         | 
         | It's OK for corporate systems, but complete overkill for
         | personal setups.
        
           | jjav wrote:
           | > It's OK for corporate systems, but complete overkill for
           | personal setups.
           | 
           | My personal files are ultimately a lot more important to me
           | and much more irreplaceable than any files at work.
           | 
           | I'd never run a NAS without ZFS and ECC.
        
           | mmh0000 wrote:
           | As for my anecdote, I had a computer with 3 HDDs in a raid5,
           | it had some of my very early programming projects and other
           | various things which I wish I still had. But, I don't have
           | any longer because something, I'm assuming memory, was
           | silently failing and over 40% of the files were turned into
           | jibberish and random binary bytes.
           | 
           | I now use ECC EVERYWHERE now. My laptop, my desktop, my
           | little home server. All ECC. Because, ECC is cheap and
           | provides a lot of protection for very little effort on my
           | part.
        
             | transpute wrote:
             | Which laptops support ECC?
        
               | mmh0000 wrote:
               | If you just want to buy something that'll "just work",
               | The Lenovo P16[1], is ECC capable from the factory.
               | Basically anything AMD "should" support ECC, it may need
               | to be turned on in the bios. The problem with "should" is
               | the trail-and-error you'll have to do to find a working
               | combination, though, I personally I've never had many
               | issues getting ECC working.
               | 
               | [1] https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/p/laptops/thinkpad/think
               | padp/th...
        
               | ndiddy wrote:
               | Note that AMD APUs prior to the 5000 series only
               | supported ECC on the "PRO" models. For example, the Ryzen
               | 3 PRO 3200G supports ECC, but the Ryzen 3 3200G doesn't.
        
         | singron wrote:
         | This is only 1 disk, so you are way more likely to lose all
         | your data due to an ordinary single disk failure than to some
         | ram errors.
        
         | Spooky23 wrote:
         | ECC for nerds is like gear heads arguing about motor oil.
        
           | kstrauser wrote:
           | Only if one set of gear heads was arguing that you don't
           | really need it.
        
       | jstanley wrote:
       | When people set up these NAS's, how are they accessing the files?
       | NFS? SFTP?
       | 
       | And how are you accessing it when away from home? A VPN that
       | you're permanently connected to? Is there a good way to do NAT
       | hole-punching?
       | 
       | Syncthing kind of does what I want, in that it lets all my
       | computers sync the same files no matter what network they're on,
       | but it insists on always copying all the files ("syncing")
       | whereas I just want them stored on the NAS but accessible
       | everywhere.
       | 
       | Nextcloud kind of does what I want but when I tried it before it
       | struck me as flaky and unreliable, and seemed to do a load of
       | stuff I don't want or need.
        
         | sleepybrett wrote:
         | Mostly CIFS, I use tailscale to put my laptop inside of my home
         | network wherever I go.
        
         | adastra22 wrote:
         | Depends on your use case. I just use scp and access the NAS box
         | through Tor when traveling, so I don't have to open up any
         | ports.
        
         | universa1 wrote:
         | Regarding the connectivity: tailscale... So far I am happy with
         | them and the free plan hasn't been kneecapped afterwards (so
         | far).
        
           | stavros wrote:
           | Even if it is, you can run Headscale on a server somewhere
           | (or just pay).
        
           | BXlnt2EachOther wrote:
           | IIRC they have improved the free plan over time, and even
           | mailed users suggesting the relaxed limits might enable
           | moving from paid to free tier [1].
           | 
           | I barely use my tailnet now, might have more of a case for it
           | later, but they are near the top of my "wishing you success
           | but please don't get acquired by a company that will ruin it"
           | list.
           | 
           | [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35615848
        
         | nomius10 wrote:
         | An easy solution for the VPN part would be Zerotier /
         | Tailscale. IIRC Zerotier uses chacha20 for encryption which is
         | faster than AES, especially for a power-strapped SBC.
        
           | jnovek wrote:
           | I tried to build a setup like this with OpenVPN years ago and
           | OMG.
           | 
           | Tailscale/Wireguard has been such a big leap forward.
        
         | Vrondi wrote:
         | I usually just use SMB shares within my LAN. It serves my
         | modest needs. I have used WebDAV or FTP in the past. Depends on
         | the specific use. Away from home, VPN is essential. Too risky
         | to just forward ports these days.
        
         | jnovek wrote:
         | Answering your questions in order:                 - On mine I
         | use NFS and SMB which covers most possible clients.
         | - I use an ssh bastion that I expose via Tailscale to connect
         | to mine remotely.  So a VPN but it's wireguard based so it's
         | not too intrusive.  I have a gig up, though, YMMV.            -
         | My NAS has 28TB of space.  I'm still working on backup
         | strategy. So far it just has my Dropbox and some ephemera I
         | don't care about losing on it.            - Regarding other
         | services: I use Dropbox pretty extensively but these days 2TB
         | just isn't very much.  Plus it gets cranky because I have more
         | than 500,000 files in it.
         | 
         | This is my personal setup but I think it's a bit different for
         | everyone.
        
           | Tijdreiziger wrote:
           | Wow! What kind of data are you generating that 2TB 'just
           | isn't very much'? (Video editing?) All my personal files take
           | up around 10GB in my Google Drive.
        
             | Koffiepoeder wrote:
             | One example: If you take picture with a decent camera in
             | raw format, your storage gets filled ridiculously fast. A
             | short travel with a mere 200 pictures can easily be like
             | 25M*200=5G. Another example: if you're doing any kind of AI
             | training (especially picture based), the training materials
             | can easily amount to many terrabytes.
        
             | galkk wrote:
             | Google takeout of my personal pictures from Google photos
             | takes 600gb+ alone. And I'm not avid picture taker (that's
             | the archive since 2000s, I did upload a lot of my old dslr
             | photos to google photos when it was unlimited). I guess if
             | people make more personal videos, they will use more space
             | easily
        
               | Tijdreiziger wrote:
               | I think we probably have different definitions of 'not an
               | avid picture taker' :D
        
         | generalizations wrote:
         | Depends on what you need. I have a NAS with syncthing, and it's
         | a combination.
         | 
         | - I use a lot of different folders within syncthing, and
         | different machines have different combinations to save space
         | where they aren't needed; the NAS has all of them.
         | 
         | - on the LAN, sshfs is a resilient-but-slower alternative to
         | NFS. If I reboot my NAS, sshfs doesn't care & reconnects
         | without complaint...last time I tried to use it, NFS locked up
         | the entire client.
         | 
         | - zerotier + sshfs is workable-but-slow in remote scenarios
         | 
         | Note I'm mostly trying to write code remotely. If you're trying
         | to watch videos....uh, good luck.
        
         | sockaddr wrote:
         | > And how are you accessing it when away from home?
         | 
         | I usually just use zerotier for this, it's extremely
         | lightweight
        
           | aborsy wrote:
           | I use Tailscale, but I'm amazed that the size of the ZeroTier
           | app is 2.6 MB versus 23MB for Tailscale.
           | 
           | How come ZeroTier is 10X smaller?
        
             | avtar wrote:
             | Tailscale uses Go https://tailscale.com/security#tailscale-
             | is-written-in-go which might explain the larger sizes.
             | 
             | A cursory look through
             | https://github.com/zerotier/ZeroTierOne shows more C++ and
             | some Rust. Not sure how much static linking is involved
             | here.
        
         | system2 wrote:
         | NFS + SMB.
         | 
         | Also I use SonicWall VPN to connect to my house to be in the
         | network so it covers most of it. I also use Synology
         | QuickConnect if I need to use the browser without VPN which
         | also covers most urgent needs. Haven't failed me over a decade
         | and my NAS also syncs with Synology C2 cloud which is also
         | another peace of mind. I know it might sound unsafe a little
         | having files stored on the cloud but it is what it is.
         | 
         | I won't play with half-baked library dependent homebrew
         | solutions which cost way more time and cause headache more than
         | commercial solutions. I won't open ports and forget them later
         | either.
        
         | 486sx33 wrote:
         | Synology does all that. I run two one at home one at the
         | office, my only complaint is that it's a bit "idiot proof"...
         | both other times the web based GUIi is great. Also has free
         | software that punches through NAT and dynamic IPs works great
         | (quickconnect.to) I use sftp, media server, primarily
        
           | tgv wrote:
           | Synology can even serve as a macOS Time Machine.
        
           | jll29 wrote:
           | I second that wholeheartedly, and I also run two 19" Synology
           | NAS units, one at home and one at the office. All smooth
           | sailing so far.
           | 
           | A colleague uses a QNAP instead, which he claims is better
           | price/storage ratio at the expense of lesser software
           | usability, and I'm okay paying a bit more of my own money (at
           | home) as well as taxpayers' money (at work) on better
           | usability, because it will likely pay off by saving time in
           | the long run, as I currently don't have a dedicated sysadmin
           | in my team.
           | 
           | The only question mark to date was when installing with non-
           | Synology (enterprise SSD) drives I got a warning that mine
           | were not "vendor sourced" devices, and decided not to take
           | any risk and replace all drives with "original" Synology ones
           | just because I can. This may be just disinformation from
           | Synology to make their own customers nervous, and it reminds
           | me of the "only HP toner in HP laser printers" discussion,
           | but it would have been a distraction to investigate further,
           | and my time is more valuable than simply replacing all
           | drives.
        
             | Tijdreiziger wrote:
             | https://www.reddit.com/r/synology/comments/zhwif2/my_new_na
             | s...
        
           | kstrauser wrote:
           | Beefier models (I have a DS923+ with the RAM bumped up to
           | 32GB) can run Docker containers, too. I have all kinds of
           | things running on mine.
        
         | pmontra wrote:
         | SFTP for my other Linux devices, SMB by Samba for the rest of
         | the world (mainly Android.)
        
         | joeyrobert wrote:
         | Seafile + Samba + OpenVPN is my stack. I use Seafile for a
         | dropbox style file sync on my devices, and Samba for direct
         | access. OpenVPN for remote access on all devices. Works quite
         | well.
        
           | ein0p wrote:
           | I'd replace OpenVPN with WireGuard at this point - WireGuard
           | is a lot faster and the client software is pretty good. All
           | of my Apple devices are set up to use VPN 100% of the time
           | automatically if I'm not on home WiFi.
        
           | accrual wrote:
           | Has anyone compared Seafile with Syncthing? I'm quite happy
           | with Syncthing but always interested in trying out new
           | setups.
        
         | theshrike79 wrote:
         | Tailscale works perfectly for remote access, I do "backups"
         | with rsync over VPN nightly to an offsite location.
         | 
         | Syncthing over Tailscale is running smoothly too, it doesn't
         | matter where my machines move, they find each other using the
         | same internal address every time.
        
         | loeg wrote:
         | I just use NFS on the LAN. No remote access.
        
         | rcarmo wrote:
         | SMB + Tailscale and SyncThing for me. Both combos just work,
         | although admittedly SMB over mobile connections _and_ a VPN can
         | be iffy.
        
         | ssl-3 wrote:
         | I use Syncthing to synchronize my smaller datasets between my
         | laptop, my phone, and my NAS. This covers all of my productive
         | and creative scenarios.
         | 
         | On the LAN, I just use SMB. It is adequate for my needs.
         | 
         | For remotely accessing my collection of Linux ISOs, I use Plex.
        
           | accrual wrote:
           | This is pretty much my setup as well!
           | 
           | Syncthing for a small collection of files I want available
           | from all my machines - commonly used documents, photos, stuff
           | I want quickly backed up or synced automatically.
           | 
           | Samba for my long term mostly-read rarely-write storage with
           | larger files, ISOs, etc.
        
           | xiwenc wrote:
           | Same here. I have wireguard vpn for the few times i need it
           | to tunnel my traffic through home or need to access larger
           | files not sync'ed with syncthing.
           | 
           | My nas is a Synology. Vpn is also used so that i can continue
           | sending timemachine backups back home when i'm traveling.
        
         | lizknope wrote:
         | I use sshfs. If you can login via ssh then you can mount the
         | remote server through ssh as a local drive.
         | 
         | https://github.com/libfuse/sshfs
         | 
         | For added security I limit my home ssh access to a handful of
         | trusted IPs including my cloud VM. Then I set up an ssh tunnel
         | from my hotel through the cloud VM to home. The cloud VM never
         | sees my password / key
        
       | CyberDildonics wrote:
       | Is there any NAS software that just lets you add disks whenever
       | you want, while using them for redundancy if they aren't full? I
       | wish something was as easy as adding another disk and having the
       | redundancy go up, then removing a disk and having the redundancy
       | go down.
        
         | loeg wrote:
         | Windows Storage Spaces kinda works like this.
        
         | yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
         | If you just want a mirror, that's easy (I like ZFS but any
         | software RAID should let you add/remove mirrored disks easily).
         | If you mean mirror until it's full then automatically convert
         | to striped, I don't think anyone does that and I don't think
         | anyone would want that, because people who care enough about
         | protecting their data to use a mirror don't want it to
         | automatically stop being a mirror.
        
         | pwg wrote:
         | Mergerfs plus SnapRAID comes close to your ask:
         | 
         | https://perfectmediaserver.com/02-tech-stack/mergerfs/
        
         | kcb wrote:
         | Unraid is probably the closest to that.
        
       | woleium wrote:
       | The image builder for this board looks dodgy af:
       | 
       | "The distribution builder is a proprietary commercial offering as
       | it involves a lot of customer IP and integrations so it cannot be
       | public."
       | 
       | Seems like a supply side injector to me!
        
         | yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
         | Yeah, reading through the linked
         | https://hub.libre.computer/t/source-code-git-repository-for-...
         | really sours my opinion of Libre Computer - shipping with UEFI
         | so you can just use generic images is a huge advantage, but
         | creating your default images (and firmware! which is worse,
         | IMO) with a proprietary process is such a big red flag that it
         | makes me question the whole thing. _If_ the firmware is FOSS
         | and you can build it yourself using only FOSS inputs (which isn
         | 't obvious to me from that discussion), then you could do that
         | and any old image (again, UEFI to support generic images is a
         | huge win) and it would be fine, but the fact that that's not
         | the default really makes me question the values/culture of the
         | company.
        
       | iforgotpassword wrote:
       | My secret protip: old Fujitsu desktop/nuc PCs. At least in
       | Germany (Europe?) they are cheap on ebay since a lot of
       | businesses use them and upgrade on a regular schedule.
       | 
       | If you care about power consumption like I do, you can Google
       | "$model energy consumption white paper" which contains very
       | accurate data about idle usage, for example
       | https://sp.ts.fujitsu.com/dmsp/Publications/public/wp-energy...
       | 
       | In one case I had a nuc where on Linux after enabling power
       | saving features for the sata controller, idle usage even fell to
       | 5W when the pdf claimed 9.
       | 
       | Having an actual pc instead of a random sbc ensures best
       | connectivity, expandability, and software support forever. With
       | almost all sbcs you're stuck with a random-ass kernel from when
       | the damn thing was released, and you basically have to
       | frankenstein together your own up-to-date distro with the old
       | kernel because the vendor certainly doesn't care about updating
       | the random armbian fork they created for that thing.
        
         | djupblue wrote:
         | Parkytowers is site about repurposing thin clients of various
         | kinds, it's a goldmine for finding out power consumption, Linux
         | compatibility, possible hardware mods, etc:
         | https://www.parkytowers.me.uk/thin/hware/hardware.shtml
        
         | jtwaleson wrote:
         | I'm looking for a machine like this (affordable, small, low
         | power usage) with 64GB memory. If anyone has any
         | recommendations I'm all ears.
        
           | transpute wrote:
           | Some Lenovo Tiny models,
           | https://forums.servethehome.com/index.php?threads/lenovo-
           | thi...
        
           | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
           | Old business laptops work well
        
         | k8sToGo wrote:
         | I have a nuc but how do I connect 6 hdds to it?
        
           | edmundsauto wrote:
           | Add a disk shelf :). Basically supplies power and data
           | cabling for just a rack of drives. Those get interfaced with
           | the NUC via a host based adapter.
        
             | justin_murray wrote:
             | Can you elaborate? What's the economic way to do this?
        
               | inhumantsar wrote:
               | Used PCIe HBA cards pulled from retired servers can be
               | found on eBay for ~$50. They have external facing ports
               | and/or internal facing ports. External is the way to go
               | if you're using a small form factor PC like a business
               | class Lenovo. These are almost all low profile cards, so
               | they will fit in any SFF PC with a PCIe slot. There are
               | special cables which will connect one port on the card to
               | four SATA- or SAS-based disks.
               | 
               | The PC's PSU will need SATA power on its cables or else
               | you'll need to scavenge a separate PSU and use the paper
               | clip trick (or better yet, a purpose built connector) to
               | get it to power things on without a motherboard
               | connected.
               | 
               | Once you have all of that, then it's just a matter of
               | housing the disks. People have done this with everything
               | from threaded rod and plastidip to 3D printed disk racks
               | to used enterprise JBOD enclosures (Just a Bunch Of
               | Disks, no joke).
               | 
               | Total cost for this setup, excluding the disks, can
               | easily be done for less than $200 if you're patient and
               | look for local deals, like a Craiglist post for a bunch
               | of old server hardware that says "free, just come haul it
               | away".
               | 
               | Check or r/DataHoarder on reddit or ServeTheHome's blog
        
           | transpute wrote:
           | Thunderbolt/USB4 -> NVME enclosure -> M.2-to-SATA OR M.2-to
           | PCIe to HBA-to-SATA.
        
         | stragies wrote:
         | I was under the impression, that for most (popular) chip
         | families, like RockChip, Allwinner, Amlogic, some assorted
         | Broadcoms, .. the Mainline linux kernel support has mostly been
         | sorted for, and it's only the stragglers like Hisilicon,
         | Huawei, Most Broadcom, Qualmcomm where mainline support is not
         | on their priority list?
        
           | numpad0 wrote:
           | Maybe, but regular distros on x86/x64 thin clients are even
           | more sorted out. GPIOs are better handled through an Arduino
           | clone over USB than with scripts running on inherently laggy
           | desktop OS.
        
           | shadowpho wrote:
           | Depends what you mean by "kernel support". In general it does
           | not really include decent idle power optimizations even on
           | say raspberry pi.
        
         | Tijdreiziger wrote:
         | I've also heard the same advice with Dell/HP SFF PC's. BTW,
         | your link requires a username/password login.
        
         | mech422 wrote:
         | ODroid H-series SBC's are standard Intel CPUs with (at least
         | for the H2+) Linux supported hardware for pretty much
         | everything (haven't tried running X on them though :-P )
         | 
         | they are my favorite 'home server' currently...cheap, standard,
         | and expandable - oh! And SILENT! :-)
        
         | green-salt wrote:
         | My local electronics resale shop had the Dell versions of
         | these, they make great hypervisors!
        
       | loeg wrote:
       | The _cheapest_ NAS is usually just taking some old desktop PC and
       | repurposing it headless. :-)
        
         | rasz wrote:
         | or even better - old laptop
        
           | criddell wrote:
           | Or a Raspberry Pi you have kicking around:
           | 
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l30sADfDiM8
        
         | derekdahmer wrote:
         | Assuming power is free. Even small wattage differences add up
         | quickly for a server running 24/7 and those older CPUs can be
         | very inefficient.
        
       | rasz wrote:
       | >total 43
       | 
       | So the price of used Sandy Bridge or newer laptop (optionally
       | cracked screen) with 1Gbit ethernet, USB3, couple SATA, couple
       | PCIE lanes (ExpressCard and mpcie slots) and build-in UPS.
        
       | haunter wrote:
       | Personally I like the Dell/HP/Lenovo Micro PCs. For ~200EUR you
       | can get one with an i5-10500T, 16GB DDR4, and 256GB NVMe SSD and
       | it can be upgraded to 64GB RAM with lot of storage (1x NVMe + 1x
       | 2,5")
        
         | cchance wrote:
         | I mean you can get one for 50$ on ebay with similar ram and hd,
         | just with a 6700 or 8700 which is more than enough for a NAS
         | lol
        
       | dariosalvi78 wrote:
       | I had an old RaspberryPi model 2 around, installed
       | OpenMediavault, a couple of USB HDs and off I went [1]. Amazing
       | what you can do with old hardware!
       | 
       | [1] https://bochovj.wordpress.com/
        
       | cchance wrote:
       | I mean wtf wouldn't you just buy a G1 Elite Slice, or any of the
       | various NUC's you can buy for 50$ and get you a full Intel
       | computer with a 6700 or 8700 cpu 4-8gb of ram and a full drive
       | slot, and normally extra space for a m2 and a gbit nic lol
        
       | nfriedly wrote:
       | My NAS is just my old gaming PC - I swapped out the GPU with a
       | more basic one, and I add another hard drive or two every time
       | storage gets low. It works great and costs me very little in both
       | money and time.
       | 
       | I'm currently at 46TB or storage, and I recently threw in a
       | 2.5Gbps NIC when I upgraded the rest of my home network.
       | 
       | (Mine certainly uses more electricity than the one in the
       | article, but I pay $0.07/kwh, and run a few docker images that
       | take advantage of the added performance, so I'm happy with it.)
        
       | superkuh wrote:
       | The entire concept of network attached storage is kind of cargo-
       | cult in the vast majority of personal use cases. Just put the
       | drives in your computer. Fewer abstraction layers, fewer
       | problems, cheaper, faster, less fragile, easier to debug and fix
       | if problems do happen. It's just not as hip or cool sounding as
       | "NAS".
        
         | transpute wrote:
         | _> Just put the drives in your computer_
         | 
         | NAS works with phones, tablets and laptops with egregiously
         | expensive, non-expandable storage.
         | 
         | On iOS/iPadOS, use SSH/SFTP to workaround business-model-
         | challenged "Files" client.
        
           | superkuh wrote:
           | A NAS is not magical. It is just a rather limited computer.
           | Anything a NAS can do so can a normal desktop, and it'll do
           | it better. Sharing files over a network is one of these
           | things. Managing the files is way, way, better since you just
           | use your normal desktop file manager rather than some NAS web
           | stuff that'll break due to CA TLS issues in a few years.
        
             | transpute wrote:
             | Among many features, ZFS offers storage snapshots,
             | deduplication and file integrity.
        
             | ac29 wrote:
             | Desktop computers are becoming increasingly uncommon. I'm a
             | pretty technologically inclined person and I havent owned a
             | desktop in years. For most people, laptops have been more
             | than capable enough for their needs for a long time. And
             | for general purpose computing, smartphones are pretty
             | heavily used too.
        
         | k8sToGo wrote:
         | Good idea to put your backup on the same machine! /s
        
           | superkuh wrote:
           | Or just put drives in all your computers and back-up between
           | instead of buying a limited (potentially proprietary) NAS
           | computer just for the purpose and having it being one central
           | point of failure.
           | 
           | I just don't understand the reluctance of people to put
           | storage in their actual computer(s).
        
         | senkora wrote:
         | A NAS is nice for serving local media files to a smart TV.
         | That's my main use case.
        
           | ajkshfkjsh wrote:
           | The thing I don't get is, why do I need to drop $1000 on a
           | Synology machine just to do this? Let's say I want to create
           | a setup with 8x18TB drives or something, do I really need to
           | spend $1000 just to make this accessible to a couple clients
           | at once (say a smart TV + another machine in the house)?
           | 
           | Right now I have Plex running on a raspberry pi hooked up to
           | an 8tb external HDD. Works fine, but I want to scale up to
           | the 100-200TB range of storage, and it feels like the market
           | is pushing me towards spending an inordinate amount of money
           | on this. Don't understand why it's so expensive.
        
             | kstrauser wrote:
             | This is my rationale for my specific circumstances:
             | 
             | With my NAS, I pay for the box, install the drives, and it
             | Just Works with basically no maintenance other than me
             | clicking the upgrade button every few months when it emails
             | me that an OS update is ready.
             | 
             | I could build a similar system myself, but the hardware
             | isn't _that_ much cheaper. Cases, PSUs, hot swappable drive
             | mounts, and all that add up quickly. And when I 'm done, I
             | have to install the OS, read the docs to see how the
             | recommended configuration has changed since last time I did
             | this, and periodically log in to look at it because it
             | doesn't have nearly as much monitoring set up out-of-the-
             | box.
             | 
             | Given the choice between the small amount of money I'd save
             | vs the amount of time I'd have to invest in it, I'd rather
             | pay the money and outsource the hassle to the NAS maker.
             | 
             | As to why I don't just hang a bunch of drives off the
             | computer I'm already using:
             | 
             | - Backups. If my Mac dies, I can restore it from the Time
             | Machine on my NAS.
             | 
             | - Noise. The NAS has busier fans than my Mac. It's in a
             | different room from where I spend most of my time.
             | 
             | - I run Docker stuff on it. I don't want those things
             | running 24/7 on my desktop.
             | 
             | - Availability. I want to reboot my desktop occasionally
             | without worrying if it'd interrupt my wife watching
             | something on Plex.
        
             | ac29 wrote:
             | 2 bay Synology NAS' are less than $200, 4 bay are less than
             | $400. Yes, if you need 144TB of storage the NAS unit is
             | going to be more expensive, but the drives themselves are
             | the majority of the cost.
        
       | test6554 wrote:
       | Everyone is an expert at storage as long as everything is working
       | great. It's when stuff fails that you feel like an idiot and
       | wished you had one extra hdd in your RAID array or a secondary
       | NAS you were backing up to or one extra site you offloaded your
       | data to.
       | 
       | I don't do cheap any more. But I can see the appeal.
        
         | rovr138 wrote:
         | These are all strategies and the price point of the unit
         | doesn't affect it.
         | 
         | Need extra drives, buy extra drives. Need extra NAS for
         | backups?, buy an extra NAS. Need an offsite copy?, buy space
         | and get an offsite NAS and drives for an offsite copy.
         | 
         | Price point of the unit doesn't change anything here.
        
           | dudus wrote:
           | Synology sure provides an expensive but complete package for
           | home office and enthusiasts.
           | 
           | Just buy it and be done with it. It's certainly more
           | expensive than DIY it yourself using off the shelf components
           | and things bought out of online classifieds. But for most
           | people that have no interest in tinkering or don't know what
           | to do, just paying the price of a complete solution might be
           | worth it.
        
             | MobileVet wrote:
             | Totally. If you enjoy the config and have the time, by all
             | means.
             | 
             | If you just want it to work, by a Synology. Mine has been
             | running strong for several years now and has docker images
             | for my unify controller, pi hole and Plex. Took minimal
             | time to setup and none since that day. Love it
             | 
             | Edit: And my encrypted cloud backup in Backblaze B2 was
             | equally as easy to setup and costs a whopping $2 a month
             | for every family pic, video and doc.
             | 
             | I have triple backup, with mirrored RAID for one of those.
             | No effort, maximum peace of mind.
        
         | russdill wrote:
         | Kids today have no idea just how often drives failed back in
         | the day.
        
           | earleybird wrote:
           | IBM deathstar[0] drives in a collection of RS6000's is still
           | too fresh in my memory :-)
           | 
           | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deskstar
        
         | brnt wrote:
         | I sync a few single external drives every week or two over good
         | old USB. In house sneaker net. Tools like Freefilesync make
         | this easy and fast (and give me a manual check so accidental
         | deletes are visible too).
         | 
         | Very cheap, has served me for more than a decade now. Highly
         | recommended. I dealt with dataloss through drive failing, user
         | error and unintentional software bugs/errors. No problem.
        
         | szundi wrote:
         | Do 2x cheap then, you need backup anyway.
        
         | p1necone wrote:
         | I think this depends on what you're storing though.
         | 
         | Business documents, accounting records, family photos - sure
         | you probably want to keep them safe.
         | 
         | But if my NAS is just 20TB of pirated movies and TV shows (not
         | that I'm saying it is...) then I'm much more comfortable buying
         | the cheapest drives I can find and seeing how it goes.
        
       | squarefoot wrote:
       | I'm happy with XigmaNAS (BSD) on a used mini-pc and a multiple
       | USB3.1 HDD enclosure. Speed is excellent as is stability. Having
       | some memory and CPU cycles to spare, I also am playing with Home
       | Assistant Supervised run as a Virtualbox VM inside of it.
       | 
       | Regarding that LaFrite board, I mailed a while ago LoverPi, which
       | appears to be the only one selling it, to ask them if they accept
       | PayPal, but got no reply. Does anyone know of a distributor in
       | the EU or a different worldwide seller?
        
       | rullopat wrote:
       | Ignorant person question here: "why they make NAS servers without
       | ECC memory?"
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | non-ECC is cheaper. i can't think of any other possible reason.
         | anything else would be a lie to cover up being cheap
        
         | bongodongobob wrote:
         | Because they barely do anything. It's like like there's 4TB of
         | RAM in there churning away at multiple databases. It's
         | debatable if you even need it in enterprise servers.
        
           | kstrauser wrote:
           | You absolutely, positively, 100% need it on anything that
           | carries data you care about. I personally consider it a hard
           | requirement for a NAS. I don't want to lose data just because
           | a cosmic ray flipped a bit somewhere.
        
       | mschuster91 wrote:
       | > 100Mb may seem like a joke nowadays, but the main purpose of
       | such a toy NAS for me is to keep a copy of a directory with ~200K
       | small files. Having 1Gb would only marginally improve the syncing
       | speed even if the SBC supported USB 3.0.
       | 
       | He's wrong here. The most important thing with small files is
       | latency, and a 1000M network will have _significantly_ less
       | latency than a 100M network.
       | 
       | Anyone running TimeMachine over network knows what I mean - local
       | attached storage is blazing fast (particularly SSDs), wired
       | network storage is noticeably worse performing, and wifi is dog
       | f...ing slow.
        
         | 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
         | So I am a network dummy, but why would 100M vs 1000M have a
         | difference in latency unless the pipe was saturated?
        
       | jamesy0ung wrote:
       | It's ironic they call themselves Libre Computer, but don't
       | release the tools to allow users to create their own images
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-07-03 23:00 UTC)