Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > GENERAL DISCUSSION > Technology and Internet
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Technology and Internet Emerging and current tech related issues. Internet, DRM, IP, and other technology related discussions.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 04-26-2019, 12:13 PM
OlderThanDirt's Avatar
OlderThanDirt OlderThanDirt is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dumbfookistan
Posts: 3,532
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

I run two different Synology NAS units, each with four hard drives and Synology RAID format. I get warnings if a hard drive is failing and can swap out the bad drive without losing any data, even if the disk completely fails. I work the snot out of these things with video surveillance from multiple cameras and locations. I have lost two WD hard drives over an 8 year period, but have not lost any data.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 04-26-2019, 12:38 PM
waawaaweenie waawaaweenie is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central, Ca
Posts: 517
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

WD Red
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 04-26-2019, 3:14 PM
crufflers's Avatar
crufflers crufflers is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8,126
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OlderThanDirt View Post
I run two different Synology NAS units, each with four hard drives and Synology RAID format. I get warnings if a hard drive is failing and can swap out the bad drive without losing any data
Right... you choose how you want to run them... typically if I have "40 TB" in drives, I get 26 TB useable space. That's less than a RAID5 calculation on Synology's site.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 04-26-2019, 4:09 PM
vino68's Avatar
vino68 vino68 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 421
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crufflers View Post
Right... you choose how you want to run them... typically if I have "40 TB" in drives, I get 26 TB useable space. That's less than a RAID5 calculation on Synology's site.
I recall Synology's default RAID is 6. I am incorrect, it is SHR.

Last edited by vino68; 04-26-2019 at 4:14 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 04-26-2019, 4:12 PM
vino68's Avatar
vino68 vino68 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 421
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbinator View Post
Some good advice in this thread, and some FUD.

I'm in the hardware storage industry and have been for years, so I have some experience with this topic.

All makers experience failed units, anything mechanical will break down over time, be it guns / cars / trucks / hard drives / toilets. Anyone who says "WD sucks" or "Seagate sucks" isn't looking at the bigger picture.

That said, most of us buy consumer drives (vs enterprise drives) and shop on price, so if price is your biggest criteria, I'd go with that. Others may need specific feature sets, so if you do, shop with that in mind and don't look back.

There really are only two manufacturers left in the world today - WD / Hitachi, and Seagate. Any other maker is a smaller player and doesn't have the volume output, engineering, distribution channels, etc. I'd go with either WD or Seagate as my recommendation on makers.

Turby
Excellent post.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 04-29-2019, 2:33 PM
MrFancyPants's Avatar
MrFancyPants MrFancyPants is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 450
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OlderThanDirt View Post
I run two different Synology NAS units, each with four hard drives and Synology RAID format. I get warnings if a hard drive is failing and can swap out the bad drive without losing any data, even if the disk completely fails. I work the snot out of these things with video surveillance from multiple cameras and locations. I have lost two WD hard drives over an 8 year period, but have not lost any data.
I hope you have that data backed up elsewhere, unless it's not critical data and you can afford to lose it. Striped parity redundancy is moderately OK to temporarily protect your data, but it shouldn't be relied upon as the end all safeguard for your critical data. A parity rebuild when a failed drive is replaced is extremely strenuous on the rest of the drives in the array, and the chance of another drive failing during the rebuild process is very high, especially if all drives were purchased and installed at the same time, due to a similar MTBF. Even if you don't experience a second (or third in the case of RAID 6) drive failure during a rebuild, the chance of encountering multiple UREs is very high. The actual percentage varies based on the size of the drives and the number of drives in the array, but generally there's a higher than 50% chance you'll hit one too many UREs, then the rebuild process stops and it's bye bye data. Not to mention as the size of single drives keeps increasing, the time to rebuild an array also increases substantially (days, if not weeks for very large arrays), which gives the drives a much longer time frame to have a problem. When I hear people talking about a RAID 5 array of 10 TB HDDs, and thinking their data is perfectly safe, it makes me cringe.

This is why RAID is quickly becoming a thing of the past, especially in enterprise environments. It's much safer to use whole volume replication to safeguard your data, and maintain 2-3 copies on physically separate and distinct media. Example, I have a 5-drive RAID 5 array at home in a QNAP NAS, 2 TB drives, but it's only the first layer of data protection. I also replicate that data to 2 other storage devices at home, and a third copy to my cloud storage provider (encrypted, last resort storage). If my RAID array suffers a catastrophic failure during a rebuild (drives are still good, knock on wood), I can take the time to build a new array and repopulate from the replicated copies of data. I have at least 3 copies of all of my data, and that's the bare minimum I'm willing to accept.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 04-29-2019, 2:51 PM
crufflers's Avatar
crufflers crufflers is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8,126
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vino68 View Post
I recall Synology's default RAID is 6. I am incorrect, it is SHR.
Yeah, SHR... the efficiency of the data protection space compared to actual storage space can go way up with more drives... I only have four... and one NIB spare on the shelf. It is a one U that maxes out at four internal. I have a Terrastation that ran forever... decade+ and it is acting up lately. That one was about 5.4 TB useable and WD's. We'll see how the Iron Wolf's do.

Last edited by crufflers; 04-29-2019 at 2:55 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 04-29-2019, 8:10 PM
Turbinator's Avatar
Turbinator Turbinator is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 11,652
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFancyPants View Post
When I hear people talking about a RAID 5 array of 10 TB HDDs, and thinking their data is perfectly safe, it makes me cringe.

This is why RAID is quickly becoming a thing of the past, especially in enterprise environments. It's much safer to use whole volume replication to safeguard your data, and maintain 2-3 copies on physically separate and distinct media.
Totally agree with your guidance, I find it's particularly relevant in enterprise environments. My opinion, I believe that most consumers aren't going to think this far and this deep about storage solutions. Most will be happy with a backup drive, a RAID 5 array, or a cloud solution, but few (I believe) will layer overlapping data protection schemes for the best in data protection. There's a cost to do so, plus one needs to moderately understand how various solutions can work together, and then take action to pay for and deploy.

Question - I haven't looked yet - do you know if there are any consumer level solutions for hardware agnostic hierarchical tiered storage? Was just thinking about this today..

Turby
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 04-29-2019, 8:50 PM
Jeepix Jeepix is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 54
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hermosabeach View Post
I don't need anything too fast.

Looking to add a second hard drive into my PC to store Photos and Video. Probably 2tb - 5tb

I know Japan had some issues with drives made after the Tsunami...

Any brands to get or Avoid?
I've worked in IT for many years, perhaps I can give you some suggestions that, based on your budget, might help.

First off, someone mentioned the external USB drives are cheaper, this is true. It's a less expensive option. I've known people, including myself, that tore them open (not easy) and installed them into their PC's. This voids the warranty, but saves you money as you will probably upgrade before it dies. You can use them as designed and plug them into your USB ports, also.

That being said, 4TB internal drives are a great value, there's a significant jump in price after that mark. So, if that's an OK size, start there.

Next, because of the value above, get TWO. Put them in a RAID1 (mirror) so if one dies you still have your data. Replace the dead one and it'll rebuild. This is "software RAID" and is supported in Win7 and Win10 (Win10 will also support RAID5), but RAID1 only uses two disks. RAID1 will get you a little faster performance when reading.

What you might want to try is a NAS, also mentioned on this thread. Terramaster has a NAS that Newegg puts on sale once in a while for $200. It'll take up to 5 drives, but you can start with 2 (mirror) and expand, changing the RAID level as you add disks. You can also upgrade (replace with larger disks) storage as it gets cheaper and the NAS will auto resize your usable space as you replace disks. You can also add more disks and it'll expand the amount of space. Easier than it sounds, but I don't want to go into this.

Brands that are good? What is mentioned here, WD, HGST, etc. I use Seagate Red (Enterprise NAS) Drives in a Synology NAS at work. They also have a 5-drive version. Better than Terramaster. I've had 2 Seagate drives out of 20 (4 NAS') go bad within 4 months.

For home use, I don't think you need the RED NAS level drives. I've used generic drives for my SAN's I had for virtualization and they lasted the typical 3-5 years. Ruining 100% of the time with disk i/o being pretty constant.

Hope that helps.

Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 04-30-2019, 12:40 PM
MrFancyPants's Avatar
MrFancyPants MrFancyPants is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 450
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbinator View Post
Question - I haven't looked yet - do you know if there are any consumer level solutions for hardware agnostic hierarchical tiered storage? Was just thinking about this today..
I know QNAP has a selection of consumer and small business class NAS devices which can do this that are pretty affordable. I'm sure other NAS manufacturers do as well, but I haven't looked. I'm partial to QNAP because I know the interface and they're solid. They support a slew of file sharing and replication protocols, the ones I'm sure of are SMB, CIFS, and iSCSI, not sure if they can host NFS shares. You should be able to connect just about any network device utilizing the protocols they offer though.

Of course for the price of a good QNAP NAS, you can also buy a used full blown server and install Windows 10 or Server 2016 or newer and use Storage Spaces, which would give you the tiered storage capability as well as all other server functionality. For example a few years ago I bought a used HP DL360 with 2 6-core Intel Xeon processors (24 threads) and 72 GB of RAM for about $500. Just depends on how hardcore you are and how much flexibility you want.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 04-30-2019, 3:12 PM
Dragunov's Avatar
Dragunov Dragunov is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: TEXAS and FREEDOM!!
Posts: 1,483
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I personally think that even though, the last few suggestions are good ones, they're over complicated for someone who just wants a simple solution, and who is most likely an average user. Simply getting a couple of these:

https://www.amazon.com/Elements-Port...2Aentries%2A=0

and hooking both up via USB, then transferring data to both for redundancy, is the most reliable way to keep data backed up. It's also the most reliable way to remember what you have stored, and where it is.

Yes, a little old fashioned, but a tried, and true method, and ANY computer, and ANY user can do it reliably. Only requires a little maintenance routine once, or twice a month.

RAID can fail BADLY. I've seen it. They're always running, making them wear out more quickly. RAID can be prone to data loss, even in a system that has been reliable.

What I'm suggesting, only runs the drives for a short time, once, or twice a month, extending the drive life for years. If one drive fails, you simply just get another one, and transfer the data, from the working one, to the new one.

This is a tried and true method for keeping data stored safely, and it is simple, and easy to do.

I have five of these drives, and a 3tb Seagate drive I've had for years. I don't fear losing any one, or two of them.

I also have a couple for backing up just my games, and stuff I need "On the go".

It's been over 15 years, since I've lost any data.

Last edited by Dragunov; 04-30-2019 at 3:18 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 05-01-2019, 7:39 AM
Dan_Eastvale's Avatar
Dan_Eastvale Dan_Eastvale is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 1,780
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I am like the OP. I have an SSD C: system and apps drive and two internal WD 1 TB Blue drives. External WD Passport backup as well.

Modern WD drives don't fail any more for the average user. I haven't heard the click of death since early 2000's..

The WD Blue drives will serve the majority perfectly
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 05-01-2019, 12:06 PM
6foot8's Avatar
6foot8 6foot8 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: San Diego area
Posts: 194
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

SSD is the way to go.

If you're going to stick with spinning platters, get the drive with the longest warranty. I know some of the makers were dropping warranties down to 2 years, but 3-year warranties (and sometimes more) were still available.
__________________
It's tough being a tall guy in a world built for average people.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 05-01-2019, 2:37 PM
crufflers's Avatar
crufflers crufflers is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8,126
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Yeah to just add a quick 2TB... you could get a cable:

https://www.amazon.com/Sabrent-2-5-I...gateway&sr=8-3

and a drive... to run it external

https://www.amazon.com/ADATA-Su800-3...gateway&sr=8-7

I'd probably get a ADATA but for $10 more you can get a WD Blue

You could opt for a 1 TB 3D Nand for $99

https://www.amazon.com/ADATA-Ultimat...ll-spons&psc=1

You say you don't want speed but these blaze and they are reliable.

If you decide to run it internal, you can do that later too. No changes except not using the cable.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 05-02-2019, 2:48 AM
the86d's Avatar
the86d the86d is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Away from large terrorist targets..
Posts: 7,370
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

This keeps reminding me, I need to backup and leave the data at my mother's in case of a fire with all the kid pictures...
__________________
Those who know Linux and use it daily generally find iPhruity Apple products useless...
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 05-02-2019, 8:03 AM
Dan_Eastvale's Avatar
Dan_Eastvale Dan_Eastvale is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 1,780
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by the86d View Post
This keeps reminding me, I need to backup and leave the data at my mother's in case of a fire with all the kid pictures...
Yes, a common enterprise and government policy as well.... Of course not at someone's mom's..
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 05-04-2019, 11:10 AM
OlderThanDirt's Avatar
OlderThanDirt OlderThanDirt is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dumbfookistan
Posts: 3,532
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFancyPants View Post
I hope you have that data backed up elsewhere, unless it's not critical data and you can afford to lose it. Striped parity redundancy is moderately OK to temporarily protect your data, but it shouldn't be relied upon as the end all safeguard for your critical data. A parity rebuild when a failed drive is replaced is extremely strenuous on the rest of the drives in the array, and the chance of another drive failing during the rebuild process is very high, especially if all drives were purchased and installed at the same time, due to a similar MTBF. Even if you don't experience a second (or third in the case of RAID 6) drive failure during a rebuild, the chance of encountering multiple UREs is very high. The actual percentage varies based on the size of the drives and the number of drives in the array, but generally there's a higher than 50% chance you'll hit one too many UREs, then the rebuild process stops and it's bye bye data. Not to mention as the size of single drives keeps increasing, the time to rebuild an array also increases substantially (days, if not weeks for very large arrays), which gives the drives a much longer time frame to have a problem. When I hear people talking about a RAID 5 array of 10 TB HDDs, and thinking their data is perfectly safe, it makes me cringe.

This is why RAID is quickly becoming a thing of the past, especially in enterprise environments. It's much safer to use whole volume replication to safeguard your data, and maintain 2-3 copies on physically separate and distinct media. Example, I have a 5-drive RAID 5 array at home in a QNAP NAS, 2 TB drives, but it's only the first layer of data protection. I also replicate that data to 2 other storage devices at home, and a third copy to my cloud storage provider (encrypted, last resort storage). If my RAID array suffers a catastrophic failure during a rebuild (drives are still good, knock on wood), I can take the time to build a new array and repopulate from the replicated copies of data. I have at least 3 copies of all of my data, and that's the bare minimum I'm willing to accept.
I think you missed the part about running two different NAS units. Iím pretty comfortable that I wonít experience two simultaneous system failures that are located in two different locations. But I also agree about multiple copies of critical data and have that covered well, with weekly device drive replication and network drives located inside safes (who needs a stinking goldenrod). Short of an EMP that takes out a region from Paso Robles down to Palm Springs, I wonít be losing any critical data. The only way I could enhance my data storage would be to store sensitive critical data on a cloud server, which I refuse to.
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 5:55 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.