FS7: In-House Storage for Back-up

Hi,
i use QNAP 870 Pro - Raid 5 (6x 4 TB HDD Seagate) as a second backup. I am more than 100% satislied. I use QNAP since +/- 7years. Not one failure. Of coure i configurate one or two hot spare feor safety.

If you connect your PC (NLE) to QNAP via LAN (cat 5), you only will have LAN transfer speed which somtimes takes time. Advantage is, your QNAP is member of your home-networt. Streaming videos/Photos/musik from your QNAP to home network places (TV, PC, beamer, etc)
Highly revommended. As i am happy i did not check other solutions.
Fast Backup is Nr 1 on NLE-drives
Slow- but secure backup is QNAP

My work - and Bachup Solution:
1.) PC --- Workdrive - Areca controller 24 TB Raid 3
2.) PC ----Backup Nr 1 - areca controller 24 TB Raid5
3.) QNAP --Backup Nr 2 - 24 TB

Cheers klfi
 
paulcurtis said:
Are you sure those archive drives will work in RAID? I'm fairly sure they won't, they're not designed for it and the NAS will have problems with them. Perhaps these are different models to the one's i've seen. You should check that before going too far with them.

I used Glacier too, but only for project/nuke script files. Assets are just too big to transfer. So unless you've got some kind of super connection i don't think that's feasible. You pay for the speed of recovery though - for large files quickly it can really add up.

I'm not aware of any horror stories with Amazon though, the whole point is the multi region redundancy? I used both Amazon S3, Glacier and also Azure without issues.

Interesting you went for QNAP, i had both a model of that and also ReadyNAS too - dumped them for synology which i've had running for years now.

cheers
Paul
Click to expand...

I talked to multiple system admins and each of them had heard stories of Amazon servers going down. Amazon does have their 50TB suitcases they can ship you to get your stuff up in the cloud quickly, but you have to go to S3 first then to Glacier.

Here's the Seagate Archive drives. I'm looking for cold storage, not for performance. Not sure why you think a reputable IT solutions company like Virtual Graffiti would sell me drives that wouldn't work with their servers.
 
Nirv said:
The Western Digital RAID Edition drives I bought for a personal RAID were the most unreliable drives I have ever purchased. It was back when 500GB drives were huge and expensive and these blighters all failed one by one over the course of about 2 months. I didn't even bother getting the drives replace under warranty.

I know what the marketing says about RAID and NAS drives but I'd love to see some independent data that backs up the claims. The great Google drive survey couldn't determine much beyond a crappy drive with initial disk errors is more likely to fail early than drives with no errors to begin with.

The real interesting data that Google discovered i.e. which manufacturers make the more reliable drives has not been released.

I'm a bit of a sceptic about the value of NAS specific drives. If you have any data that supports the NAS claims I'd love to read it.
Click to expand...

Here's the data that Backblaze did on drives. It seems the most reliable are the lower RPM drives.
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-reliability-q3-2015/
 
sk810, thanks a lot for sharing your first hand experience with QNab.. I think we have pretty much settled on QNab for local back-up and LTO 7 for archiving..
cheers
Berk
 
My QNAP is only 24 TB but no complaints. Make sure you optimize the networking side of things so you don't unnecessarily limit your throughput.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top