Solid State Drive/ Network Area Storage

appraiser

NES Member
Rating - 100%
16   0   0
Joined
Mar 14, 2008
Messages
10,893
Likes
5,418
OK a question for the computer literate.

I would like at least one Terabyte of Solid State memory, if not more, and if possible something I can plug into my router and use as a network area storage

1TB SSD's configured as a portable storage device ( USB) seem to be in the 160 dollar a TB range

Cases to hold a SATA SSD are short money and the drives are about $120 a TB.

I'm trying to find a affordable and reliable way to store pictures, because at some point one of the 3 laptop hard drives will crap out and I will be S.O.L. trying to recover the data.

For a couple of hundred bucks it seems I can get about 1.5TB of SSD memory, a 1TB and a 500gig

I'll take any suggestions from the knowledgeable tech savvy NES'rs on the best way to do this, and if I should forget SSD and just get a regular HDD storage device for about half the cost

Thanks in advance
 

pdm

NES Member
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Messages
9,860
Likes
946
Location
Taxachusetts
Technically, a single drive isn't really a backup strategy. It's not redundant, so if the drive dies, your backup dies. You're better with a RAID setup, so a Synology or something like that connected to your router is better (you can get cheaper and bigger spinning drives or SSDs, depends on your budget). Now, do I essentially do the same thing? Yup. I haven't gotten around to building out a RAID array attached to the server that I have doing the simple backup drive on. I've got the SAS card, I just haven't dropped the coin for the drives and enclosure. And I'll probably need another UPS for the occasional power drop.
 

whatluck

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
10,009
Likes
7,415
Location
Braintree, MA
You have an old computer laying around? I would install freeNAS, and set up some redundancy. Something like RAID5, you use 4x 500 GB drives and get 1TB, but you can lose up to 2 drives and not lose data.

Or you can buy 2x 1TB USB drives and use them for daily backups, and rotate them offsite weekly.
 

pewpewpew

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 1, 2020
Messages
88
Likes
101
Location
North Shore
Why the preference for an SSD over an HDD if it is just for backup? I would think that a cloud-based solution would be best, like AWS S3 or Glacier -- that is what I plan to do someday (soon).
 

BostonVI

NES Member
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
Joined
Jan 12, 2011
Messages
2,418
Likes
1,879
Location
MA
If you already have a USB enabled router, I'd go with one of the external RAID 1 options, and call it a day.

I haven't benched the IO and latency on my home setup, but while it's not that zippy, it is convenient and keeps me from spending money on a NAS which would be overkill for what I need it tondom

View: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01AWH04EW/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_Mn8IFbPTDMQ2V
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 25, 2020
Messages
523
Likes
310
Location
Lowell Mass
This a tough one, I stored everything I want to save on DVD's I also store them on a WD 1+ TB Passport. My main drive on my newly built PC is a one TB Inland SSD M.2 and it is fast.
 
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Mar 30, 2008
Messages
3,537
Likes
2,965
Location
NH
We have a synology NAS with four 5tb drives. We should have done this years ago. It's configured for raid and we put everything on it and it is accessable from any device on our LAN.
 

RDG

Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Jul 18, 2013
Messages
2,054
Likes
1,004
Location
Western, MA
Another vote for Synology NAS.
I've got a DS218+ with two 12TB drives running in Synology's hydrid RAID.
all of our pictures, music, TV and Movies are stored on it.
I don't worry about loosing them. Access it all from anywhere. It was worth the initial cost.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Apr 9, 2018
Messages
941
Likes
1,692
Location
NH
I use a dedicated Raspberry Pi 4 with a Seagate Ironwolf 4TB drive and Samba sharing. Not an SSD, but the performance in my opinion is good for almost any home gamer application.
 

whatluck

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
10,009
Likes
7,415
Location
Braintree, MA

BostonVI

NES Member
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
Joined
Jan 12, 2011
Messages
2,418
Likes
1,879
Location
MA
The dye on DVDs breaks down over time. I wouldn't trust them for more than a year.
Way back when I used to keep Divx movies on DVD-R and the failure rate after a few years was like 25-30%. Coincidentally, the cost of HDDs went down so it was a no brainer to switch.
 
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Feb 21, 2013
Messages
3,539
Likes
1,460
The dye on DVDs breaks down over time. I wouldn't trust them for more than a year.
For regular DVDs I agree, but there are archival DVDs for this purpose with something like a 100 year rating. Seems pointless now that redundant drives are cheap and easy to configure but 10-15 years ago they were often used.
 

whatluck

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
10,009
Likes
7,415
Location
Braintree, MA
Way back when I used to keep Divx movies on DVD-R and the failure rate after a few years was like 25-30%. Coincidentally, the cost of HDDs went down so it was a no brainer to switch.
I had a client keep the only copy of his research data pertaining to a pending patent on a DVD. I got that call and said, take a picture of the bottom of the disk for me. Looked like blue and green tye dye. Ontrack was actually able to recover the data. He was freaked out letting anyone else have that disk, but I told him the data's gone, so either nobody has it or you AND ontrack has it.

Since then I've set him up with encryption at rest, protected by a hardware token. Block level encrypted backups to the cloud.
 

whatluck

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
10,009
Likes
7,415
Location
Braintree, MA
For regular DVDs I agree, but there are archival DVDs for this purpose with something like a 100 year rating. Seems pointless now that redundant drives are cheap and easy to configure but 10-15 years ago they were often used.
Tons of people use archival DVDs to make backups. People who are legally obligated to keep records for n years but don't have a high volume of data and have low deltas can save a ton of money on spinning disk storage. Technical skinflinting is why I have half the customers I do.
 

BostonVI

NES Member
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
Joined
Jan 12, 2011
Messages
2,418
Likes
1,879
Location
MA
I had a client keep the only copy of his research data pertaining to a pending patent on a DVD. I got that call and said, take a picture of the bottom of the disk for me. Looked like blue and green tye dye. Ontrack was actually able to recover the data. He was freaked out letting anyone else have that disk, but I told him the data's gone, so either nobody has it or you AND ontrack has it.

Since then I've set him up with encryption at rest, protected by a hardware token. Block level encrypted backups to the cloud.
Clients only need to learn that lesson once.
 

DarthRevan

Instructor
NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Jan 8, 2014
Messages
6,080
Likes
3,994
Location
Lynn, MA
And here I am thinking I’m cool, living in the fast lane, just having installed my own 2 TB SSD in my laptop with no real computer knowledge, and y’all are more than 6x my volume just backing things up.

9D48A1AD-21AE-43C1-8A96-A970739FA91C.gif
 

42!

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
7,435
Likes
5,035
You have an old computer laying around? I would install freeNAS, and set up some redundancy. Something like RAID5, you use 4x 500 GB drives and get 1TB, but you can lose up to 2 drives and not lose data.

Or you can buy 2x 1TB USB drives and use them for daily backups, and rotate them offsite weekly.
RAID5 protects against the los of ONE drive not 2. Four drives in a RAID6 would protect against 2 failures, as would a 3 drive RAID5 with a warm spare.

But personally I think the OP is looking for something he can buy and use, not something he can build that requires more technical skills to reach the same level of reliability. I might use FreeNAS, but if you're not a techie type I don't recommend building your own from scratch.
 

whatluck

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
10,009
Likes
7,415
Location
Braintree, MA
RAID5 protects against the los of ONE drive not 2. Four drives in a RAID6 would protect against 2 failures, as would a 3 drive RAID5 with a warm spare.

But personally I think the OP is looking for something he can buy and use, not something he can build that requires more technical skills to reach the same level of reliability. I might use FreeNAS, but if you're not a techie type I don't recommend building your own from scratch.
I said you CAN lose up to 2 drives in a 4x 500Gb = 1TB RAID5 config, that would be 2 drives striping, one parity drive, and one hot spare. You can lose one drive and have it replicate to the hot spare, and then lose another and have enough parity information to keep going. I appreciate you trying to keep me on my toes, though. FreeNAS is super easy, about as easy as it gets, as easy as synology once it's installed. If you can install Windows and use configure a Synology you can install and configure freeNAS.
 

pdm

NES Member
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Messages
9,860
Likes
946
Location
Taxachusetts
Why the preference for an SSD over an HDD if it is just for backup? I would think that a cloud-based solution would be best, like AWS S3 or Glacier -- that is what I plan to do someday (soon).
For me, power and noise. Get 10 spinning drives firing up at once in the same room as you, you'll notice. And then the background noise, especially when reading and writing. You'll need fans to clear the heat from those spindles too. SSDs are faster for reads and writes, but that advantage gets limited by your network speed at some point -- unless you're nuts and are running a 10gbit home network. Then you have my envy. 😉

Since I'm down in my office right next to my server all day, I'm trying to keep the ambient noise down. And I think we're all trying to minimize our power bills these days.

A good plan is distributed, especially if it's stuff you want to keep. So a local off-machine nearline backup is good, but it is better if you then replicate that to the cloud or otherwise offsite. Assuming you trust the cloud provider to not snoop.
 

42!

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
7,435
Likes
5,035
I said you CAN lose up to 2 drives in a 4x 500Gb = 1TB RAID5 config, that would be 2 drives striping, one parity drive, and one hot spare. You can lose one drive and have it replicate to the hot spare, and then lose another and have enough parity information to keep going. I appreciate you trying to keep me on my toes, though. FreeNAS is super easy, about as easy as it gets, as easy as synology once it's installed. If you can install Windows and use configure a Synology you can install and configure freeNAS.
But that's not RAID5. RAID5 is a minimum of 3 drives (one being parity), but can be more drives with only one being parity. What you NOW describe is a RAID5 with a spare, not the same thing since RAID5 does NOT inherently allow for 2 failures. Of course with 4 drives you can do a RAID 6 which would allow for 2 drive failures (since there are 2 parity drives). The trade off of RAID5+spare v. RAID6 is operational throughput v. rebuild time/risk. RAID6 is technically slower since it must create 2 parity drives, but the protection is real-time, no rebuild necessary if a drive fails, it just becomes a RAID5 array. On the other hand, a RAID5 with spare will take time to rebuild if a drive fails. This will slow throughput and creates a risk of an unrecoverable failure, during the rebuild.
 

42!

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
7,435
Likes
5,035
For me, power and noise. Get 10 spinning drives firing up at once in the same room as you, you'll notice. And then the background noise, especially when reading and writing. You'll need fans to clear the heat from those spindles too. SSDs are faster for reads and writes, but that advantage gets limited by your network speed at some point -- unless you're nuts and are running a 10gbit home network. Then you have my envy. 😉

Since I'm down in my office right next to my server all day, I'm trying to keep the ambient noise down. And I think we're all trying to minimize our power bills these days.

A good plan is distributed, especially if it's stuff you want to keep. So a local off-machine nearline backup is good, but it is better if you then replicate that to the cloud or otherwise offsite. Assuming you trust the cloud provider to not snoop.
SSDs have a finite write capability, so frequency of write operations is a factor. It sucks when your 3 years into your 5 year lifecycle and your SSDs start dropping because they've hit their lifetime write limits. I've got a DB server with a RAID50 (+2 spares) that is cranking all the time, if it was SSD it would last a year. But ya, all those 15K SAS drives make some noise and heat.
 

pdm

NES Member
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Messages
9,860
Likes
946
Location
Taxachusetts
SSDs have a finite write capability, so frequency of write operations is a factor. It sucks when your 3 years into your 5 year lifecycle and your SSDs start dropping because they've hit their lifetime write limits. I've got a DB server with a RAID50 (+2 spares) that is cranking all the time, if it was SSD it would last a year. But ya, all those 15K SAS drives make some noise and heat.
My ideal setup is using SAS drives for bulk storage, but attaching a couple of SSDs for read/write caching. Enterprise-class SSDs will outlast consumer level SSDs all day long, but yeah, they will die eventually. But I've had spindles die on me too. HGST Deathstars anyone? Heh.
 

whatluck

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
10,009
Likes
7,415
Location
Braintree, MA
But that's not RAID5. RAID5 is a minimum of 3 drives (one being parity), but can be more drives with only one being parity. What you NOW describe is a RAID5 with a spare, not the same thing since RAID5 does NOT inherently allow for 2 failures. Of course with 4 drives you can do a RAID 6 which would allow for 2 drive failures (since there are 2 parity drives). The trade off of RAID5+spare v. RAID6 is operational throughput v. rebuild time/risk. RAID6 is technically slower since it must create 2 parity drives, but the protection is real-time, no rebuild necessary if a drive fails, it just becomes a RAID5 array. On the other hand, a RAID5 with spare will take time to rebuild if a drive fails. This will slow throughput and creates a risk of an unrecoverable failure, during the rebuild.
Raid5 + a spare is still Raid 5.
 
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
639
Likes
567
My ideal setup is using SAS drives for bulk storage, but attaching a couple of SSDs for read/write caching. Enterprise-class SSDs will outlast consumer level SSDs all day long, but yeah, they will die eventually. But I've had spindles die on me too. HGST Deathstars anyone? Heh.
Jumping on the Synology bandwagon to say that their enclosures (at least some of them, including mine) have NVMe slots for SSD cache.
 

42!

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
7,435
Likes
5,035
My ideal setup is using SAS drives for bulk storage, but attaching a couple of SSDs for read/write caching. Enterprise-class SSDs will outlast consumer level SSDs all day long, but yeah, they will die eventually. But I've had spindles die on me too. HGST Deathstars anyone? Heh.
Check out Nimble, unless they've gon downhill since HP bought them, they are what you're talking about.

Raid5 + a spare is still Raid 5.
Yes, but RAID5 doesn't inherently include a spare, so unless you say RAID5+spare, then it's just RAID5 and can only survive a single failure. Spec a few hundred enterprise systems and you'll get how important these distinctions are.
 
Top Bottom