Synology, Qnap, Drobo or regular hard drive bay

[Benhider]

Hi all,

I'm researching hard drive solutions for my photography business. I run it out of my home and currently archive about 6TB of CR2 files a year. I've been using 2TB drives in Startech 4 drive bays and just switching them out as they fill up. But recently I nearly lost a drive (luckily rescued the data by safe boot and transferred images onto new drive) and have been thinking about using a more central drive dump over my wireless network. I know its not the fastest way to access or archive data, but I often keep the most recent work on my laptop and only use the drives to archive raws. I also run a photo shelter account to deliver jpegs to clients and that works as another access point or backup of final jpegs.

I'd like a drive system that does not use RAID but can dupe drives for secondary backups that can be moved offsite and is functional over a home wifi setup. It seems like the Sinology DS1515+ is the best option with 5 x 6TB drives. Does anyone have any experience with this system used at home with your photography archive? Any thoughts or experience greatly welcomed.

I've owned a drobo before but it didn't seem to work very well and I sold it on eBay a few months later. But that was maybe 5 years ago and I know they've improved somewhat.

Does the DS1515+ work well with an additional drive attached for more space or backup/clone?

Can I load 4TB drives with data on them without issue?

Do you use any other system you can recommend?

How long does it take to archive 10GB of data across my wifi (roughly)?

Does a NAS make much noise in your living space? Do the drives spin much? Does that up the risk of drives failing

 

[kaihp]

I'd like a drive system that does not use RAID but can dupe drives for secondary backups that can be moved offsite and is functional over a home wifi setup.

Looks like from the specs page that the DS1515+ can do this for you. Mind you, the drives are formatted in Linux "ext4" filesystem, so you cannot connect your drive directly to a PC or MAC.

Can I load 4TB drives with data on them without issue?

It is very unlikely that you can load a 4TB drive with data on it and have it use it. The spec page for the DS1515+ says in only support the Linux filesystem "ext4" on the internal drives, but you could attach your 4TB drive through a USB3 adapter and copy the files over.

How long does it take to archive 10GB of data across my wifi (roughly)?

Does a NAS make much noise in your living space? Do the drives spin much? Does that up the risk of drives failing

I would not recommend trying to move significant amounts of data across WIFI. It's simply too slow. For your 10GB of data, you would probably see a transfer time of about an hour (~22Mbit/s sustained). Since the WIFI is a one-way ("simplex") shared media, any electronic noise, other users etc will impact this. Sometimes severely.

Cable up that laptop when transferring your data, even if only temporarily.

My own NAS is located in my basement, connected to 1G Ethernet along with my desktop. My laptop gets connected to the LAN (with WLAN turned off) if I need to move any significant amout of data (100MB or more).

As for noise, the noise of my own system (6 x 6TB WD Red's, passively cooled mobo) is dominated by fan noise. Switching from simple voltage controlled 3-pin fans to 4-pin (PWM-controlled) fans made a major difference.

 

[Orangutan]

Hi all,

I'm researching hard drive solutions for my photography business. I run it out of my home and currently archive about 6TB of CR2 files a year. I've been using 2TB drives in Startech 4 drive bays and just switching them out as they fill up. But recently I nearly lost a drive (luckily rescued the data by safe boot and transferred images onto new drive) and have been thinking about using a more central drive dump over my wireless network. I know its not the fastest way to access or archive data, but I often keep the most recent work on my laptop and only use the drives to archive raws. I also run a photo shelter account to deliver jpegs to clients and that works as another access point or backup of final jpegs.

I'd like a drive system that does not use RAID but can dupe drives for secondary backups that can be moved offsite and is functional over a home wifi setup. It seems like the Sinology DS1515+ is the best option with 5 x 6TB drives. Does anyone have any experience with this system used at home with your photography archive? Any thoughts or experience greatly welcomed.

A business backup strategy is not easy, and you need to think this through more carefully. I recommend you think about your data security needs first, then think about how to meet those needs.

Before we get to security, let's anticipate some negative events that could require you to pull from backup. That will lead us to our backup solution.
[list type=decimal]
[*]Laptop loss (e.g. total hard drive failure, or loss/theft of laptop)
[*]Accidental deletion of some RAW files from laptop.
[*]Catastrophic damage to your home (e.g. fire/flood that destroys all your computer gear)
[*]Long-ago client wants more work done with old photos, or evidence for a lawsuit.
[/list]

One more item to remember: it's your most recent data that is the most valuable, so you need to think about getting your shoot data safe as quickly as possible. You don't want to lose data before you have fulfilled your contract.

Next, here are some options for each of these:

[list type=decimal]
[*]Laptop loss. If you are a Mac person, become religious about using Time Machine. Better yet, have two Time Machine backups, either in parallel or alternating. There are similar options on the Windows side.
[*]Accidental deletion: your Time Machine backups will handle this.
[*]Catastrophic home damage: The key difference from #1 is the need for an off-site backup. Keep one Time Machine (or Windows equiv) offsite or, at minimum, in a waterproof container in a fireproof safe in your basement or garage.
[*]Two options here that I can think of: either send period backups (on HD) off-site to a friend's house or safe deposit box; or burn several copies of each RAW set to Blu-Ray discs, and store them off-site. Blu-Ray is slower, but cheaper.
[/list]

When you think about a NAS, which of the above slots does it fit? It will guard against laptop loss or accidental deletion, but won't guard against catastrophic home damage or allow you to retrieve RAW from 3 years ago (unless it's huge). So your NAS is really just your Time Machine backup, and is not a key part of the workflow you've described. If you choose a NAS to fill this role, it should be robust enough to be worthwhile, which means you absolutely need to use RAID.

How long does it take to archive 10GB of data across my wifi (roughly)?

Using SSD and fairly recent WiFi, assume copy to spinning HDs at about 10-100MB/s. So at the top end (time) it would be:
(10GB/10MB) = 1000 seconds = 16.7 minutes
At the bottom-end (time) it would be 100 seconds = 1:40.

Does a NAS make much noise in your living space? Do the drives spin much? Does that up the risk of drives failing

Fan noise varies by NAS model and HD model. Some are very quiet, others not. You'll need to check each model. Personally, it doesn't bother me.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

A NAS unit without raid is certainly possible, but also a waste of money. Raid is what prevents a simple disk crash from wiping out your data. I use 4GB drives in my Qnap, and I'm sure that Synology will allow 4GB or larger drives. The spec for the 1515+ is 8GB, but they typically issue firmware updates as larger drives hit the mass markets. Get a NAS with more drives and run Raid 6. Make Backups!!

A NAS with five 6GB drives will have its fans running a lot, and likely at high speeds. The issue is that 6GB drives dissipate more power, and they are packed into a small space. Plan on noise, and potentially, a lot of it.
The Synology has two eSATA ports, use them for external drives. Forget Wi-Fi.

 

[Don Haines]

A NAS unit without raid is certainly possible, but also a waste of money. Raid is what prevents a simple disk crash from wiping out your data. I use 4GB drives in my Qnap, and I'm sure that Synology will allow 4GB or larger drives. The spec for the 1515+ is 8GB, but they typically issue firmware updates as larger drives hit the mass markets. Get a NAS with more drives and run Raid 6. Make Backups!!

A NAS with five 6GB drives will have its fans running a lot, and likely at high speeds. The issue is that 6GB drives dissipate more power, and they are packed into a small space. Plan on noise, and potentially, a lot of it.
The Synology has two eSATA ports, use them for external drives. Forget Wi-Fi.

agreed!

You are running the backup for data security so RAID6 is the way to go...... you can tolerate multiple disk failures and not loose data.

Don't even think of running your backup over WiFi.... it is SLOW!!!!!!!! Your WiFi link is a half-duplex link with lots of dead air time when the link turns around. For typical PC to NAS data transfers over WiFi you will be lucky to hit 10 percent of the link speed, where on a wired link you can see up to 85 percent of the link speed (depending on hardware).

 

[Orangutan]

Don't even think of running your backup over WiFi.... it is SLOW!!!!!!!! Your WiFi link is a half-duplex link with lots of dead air time when the link turns around. For typical PC to NAS data transfers over WiFi you will be lucky to hit 10 percent of the link speed, where on a wired link you can see up to 85 percent of the link speed (depending on hardware).

I used to believe this as well, but I did a bit of searching on the web, and found that, under ideal circumstances and using latest-gen hardware, speed is much improved. I have no personal experience with it, however, since I use wireless only for convenience, not throughput.

RAID 6

Agreed, but it sounds like his on-site is for convenience, not for persistence. If he's really generating 6TB of data each year that must be kept for several years, then long-term, off-site storage is his real challenge.

 

[Don Haines]

I used to believe this as well, but I did a bit of searching on the web, and found that, under ideal circumstances and using latest-gen hardware, speed is much improved. I have no personal experience with it, however, since I use wireless only for convenience, not throughput.

Yeah..... packet shapers are wonderful things.... you can get decent throughput through a link, but not with the typical hardware and software people are using.....

For TCP/IP over WiFi it's the latency that kills the throughput, not the link speed. Convert it into a stream and the throughput leaps upwards....

 

[Orangutan]

I used to believe this as well, but I did a bit of searching on the web, and found that, under ideal circumstances and using latest-gen hardware, speed is much improved. I have no personal experience with it, however, since I use wireless only for convenience, not throughput.

Yeah..... packet shapers are wonderful things.... you can get decent throughput through a link, but not with the typical hardware and software people are using.....

For TCP/IP over WiFi it's the latency that kills the throughput, not the link speed. Convert it into a stream and the throughput leaps upwards....

That makes sense, but I thought the TCP standard deals with latency reasonably well (it's supposed to work over a WAN) Is it a problem on the endpoint implementation? (e.g. fast timeout, small window size, etc) It's been a few years since I've stared at packet dumps, so I'm sure I misremember something.

The main point of my original reply to OP was that he was thinking "what NAS should I buy," rather than "what are my backup needs." He can buy top-notch hardware, but if he doesn't implement a well-considered backup scheme it will not do what he needs.

 

[Don Haines]

The main point of my original reply to OP was that he was thinking "what NAS should I buy," rather than "what are my backup needs." He can buy top-notch hardware, but if he doesn't implement a well-considered backup scheme it will not do what he needs.

Quite right.....

I have seen too many cases where the backup is to a box beside the computer, fire or thieves strike, and both the backup and the original data are gone.

I have two backups..... one to a different room in the house, and the other sitting in a locked cabinet at work.

 

[kaihp]

I have seen too many cases where the backup is to a box beside the computer, fire or thieves strike, and both the backup and the original data are gone.

I have two backups..... one to a different room in the house, and the other sitting in a locked cabinet at work.

If you have a decent Internet upload speed*, consider getting an online backup, like crashplan or backblaze. they're like USD5/month for unlimited storage.

*) With a DSL upload speed of 4Mbit/s, it's taking me about 50 days to do the first full backup

 

[Orangutan]

If you have a decent Internet upload speed*, consider getting an online backup, like crashplan or backblaze. they're like USD5/month for unlimited storage.

*) With a DSL upload speed of 4Mbit/s, it's taking me about 50 days to do the first full backup

OP says he has 6TB per year. Assuming I did the arithmetic correctly, that works out to 139 days of continuous upload, not counting any redundancy. On average, it will take about 3 full days each week to upload new material. That might work for long-term storage, but not for short-term. If OP has an option for 20Mb upload speeds that might be viable. That seems like a reasonable business expense.

 

[Zeidora]

I would not use anything but RAID1 flavor (straight RAID1 or RAID10). With RAID5/6 after an first drive failure, the failure rate for remaining drives goes up rapidly, because of additional strain put on them. Even applies when you put a new drive in to get the system back up to full functionality.

But overall agree, that RAID is a first level of data security, with second layer being physical separation. That's my strategy.

Not too much of a fan of NAS. Used to have them, but had some NAS controllers fail on me, which completely bricks the unit. Unless you absolutely need the network aspect of the drive, I would go with straight USB3/thunderbolt drives. The lower the complexity, the fewer failure points you have.

For business, you may need to consider that there is no 100% data security. Accordingly, I would adjust my contract with language that limits my liability in case of data loss for whatever reason.

 

[LDS]

I used to believe this as well, but I did a bit of searching on the web, and found that, under ideal circumstances and using latest-gen hardware, speed is much improved. I have no personal experience with it, however, since I use wireless only for convenience, not throughput.

AC1200 and beyond can reach decent speeds, but remember they employ a multi-antenna setup. To achieve the fastest speeds, both devices need to have the right number of antennas. Many portable devices may not have the full number of antennas required.

Anyway, a cable connection is usually more reliable because less prone to interferences (if cables are good, and well installed). For the same reason, 5Ghz channels are better than 2.4GHz ones.

If someone really needs speeds, 10Gb Ethernet is becoming affordable, although still not cheap. Teaming/bonding of one of more Ethernet cards is also possible, with the right hardware.

 

[Benhider]

Thanks

 

[LDS]

I'd like a drive system that does not use RAID but can dupe drives for secondary backups that can be moved offsite and is functional over a home wifi setup.

If your business depends on data stored electronically, you need multiple lines of defense. Especially, you need to minimize the "windows" when critical data are stored on a single point of failure - be it your card, laptop or single external hard disk. Any time it happens, the risk of a total loss is greater.

RAID ensures basic redundancy and availability. A single disk failure (or even more than one, depending on the RAID level) won't lead to a total (or partial) loss - and availability means you can also met a deadline, and backup any yet not backed up data. Of course RAID alone is not enough, and multiple backups needs to be made (and verified to ensure they are correct and readable). It is true actual RAID technologies may have been pushed to their limits due to the size of actual disks, but there is not yet a better solution for small setups (large ones may use automatic replicas across different systems and media, but it would be very expensive to replicate them at home).

I would suggest you to setup at least a NAS with a RAID level you feel comfortable with and can afford, and make a copy of your data to it as soon as possible. Some people also setup a second NAS for an automatic replica from the first one, especially if they use the first as a "workarea" also. Some NAS may allow to attach a second set of disks (via eSATA or the like) which may be used for the same purpose, but it is somewhat less "redundant".

Then the NAS copy should backed up to a reliable medium, and moved offsite. If you backup to disks, may be more reliable to insert them into an empty bay in the NAS, or using an external adapter for disks, than using ready-made external disks via USB or Thunderbolt. This way you can buy known disk models good for long term backup tasks. Store them away in boxes designed for disk storage.

"Cloud" backup are also an option. Some services allow for importing data from hard disks the first time, and then add new ones over the Internet. Of course you need a fast enough connection for your needs. Take into account not only the time needed to backup data, but how long it takes to access them in case of a local failure, and if you are forced to restore everything, or you can access a subset of needed data.

 

[kaihp]

OP says he has 6TB per year.
<snip>
If OP has an option for 20Mb upload speeds that might be viable.

Like I said: decent upload speed. For backup.
I don't consider 4Mbps "decent", but I can't get better than that without a cap on transfer.

I would not use anything but RAID1 flavor (straight RAID1 or RAID10). With RAID5/6 after an first drive failure, the failure rate for remaining drives goes up rapidly, because of additional strain put on them. Even applies when you put a new drive in to get the system back up to full functionality.

While RAID5 do have these issues (and that's why RAID5 is generally not recommended for drives above 3-4TB), RAID-6/RAIDZ2 can tolerate 2 drive failures, so it's not problem here (another 1E-14 gets multiplied on the probability).
RAID6 can handle two drive failures without loosing data: first the "normal" failed drive and then the second failed drive while rebuilding/resilvering a new drive and still keep your data safe.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Don't even think of running your backup over WiFi.... it is SLOW!!!!!!!! Your WiFi link is a half-duplex link with lots of dead air time when the link turns around. For typical PC to NAS data transfers over WiFi you will be lucky to hit 10 percent of the link speed, where on a wired link you can see up to 85 percent of the link speed (depending on hardware).

I used to believe this as well, but I did a bit of searching on the web, and found that, under ideal circumstances and using latest-gen hardware, speed is much improved. I have no personal experience with it, however, since I use wireless only for convenience, not throughput.

RAID 6

Agreed, but it sounds like his on-site is for convenience, not for persistence. If he's really generating 6TB of data each year that must be kept for several years, then long-term, off-site storage is his real challenge.

Security of data over Wi-Fi is a serious issue, so you need to have strong security, and even then, its a weakness. The strong security slows down speeds along with the standard factors like noise, distance, etc.

It might be possible to setup a NAS using 1900AC, but Make sure you have a USB 3 port on your Nas what works with a 1900AC Wi-Fi Wi-Fi into the NAS.

Then, there is the not so small issue that 1900AC USB adapters do not exist. Typically, using one of these adapters is how you activate Wi-Fi on a NAS.

Then, Your NAS may only work with certain adapters.

Forget Wi-Fi.

 

[Don Haines]

OP says he has 6TB per year.
<snip>
If OP has an option for 20Mb upload speeds that might be viable.

Like I said: decent upload speed. For backup.
I don't consider 4Mbps "decent", but I can't get better than that without a cap on transfer.

I would not use anything but RAID1 flavor (straight RAID1 or RAID10). With RAID5/6 after an first drive failure, the failure rate for remaining drives goes up rapidly, because of additional strain put on them. Even applies when you put a new drive in to get the system back up to full functionality.

While RAID5 do have these issues (and that's why RAID5 is generally not recommended for drives above 3-4TB), RAID-6/RAIDZ2 can tolerate 2 drive failures, so it's not problem here (another 1E-14 gets multiplied on the probability).
RAID6 can handle two drive failures without loosing data: first the "normal" failed drive and then the second failed drive while rebuilding/resilvering a new drive and still keep your data safe.

I have a four different raid6 arrays (6 drives each) running at work where failure is NOT an option.... We bought 48 drives (24 active, 24 spare) and so far (about 3 years later) have swapped out about half of the drives... no data lost after 3 years of always on.... never had more than 1 drive fail at a time....

As far as drives in PCs go, I swap out about 100 or so a year.... most are killed by heat. DO NOT!!!! put your PC on the floor under a desk where the intake or exhaust is blocked. No air flow kills PCs. Being on the floor means lots of dust inside and that leads to overheating. If you are shopping for one, make sure that it has (or can take) a 120mm (or more) fan for cooling the chassis and that your power supply also has a 120mm fan. The big fans are quieter and move more air. Heat kills!

 

[pwp]

Just. Don't. Get. Drobo.

There was a great thread on this subject last year which covers the OP's questions very thoroughly.
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=28459.msg561643#msg561643

-pw

 

[LDS]

Security of data over Wi-Fi is a serious issue, so you need to have strong security, and even then, its a weakness. The strong security slows down speeds along with the standard factors like noise, distance, etc.

It might be possible to setup a NAS using 1900AC, but Make sure you have a USB 3 port on your Nas what works with a 1900AC Wi-Fi Wi-Fi into the NAS.

Then, there is the not so small issue that 1900AC USB adapters do not exist. Typically, using one of these adapters is how you activate Wi-Fi on a NAS.

Then, Your NAS may only work with certain adapters.

Forget Wi-Fi.

WPA2-PSK is secure enough (with a long key) unless you fear very capable attacks (WPA2-Enterprise is more secure but requires a more complex setup). Of course WEP and WPA must be avoided. Security does not reduce speed unless you're using very old hardware. The actual one is powerful enough to cope with WPA2 security requirements.

To connect a NAS, you could also use a WiFi access point configured as a bridge, or one of the WiFi extenders now available with Ethernet ports. The NAS is connected to an Ethernet port, so as far as the NAS knows, it is connected to an Ethernet network, and there are no compatibility issues.

Of course these are solutions if using WiFi is unavoidable. I'd go for a cable connection whenever feasible too.