RT-AX86U -- can I use a USB 3.0 hub to connect multiple external HDDs?

[Tech9]

It is going to be a little better than the USB 3.0 hub you wanted just few days back.

 

[Qbcd]

But the firmware/software (on the Synology) is at least100x better out of the box than most can configure a bare-bones computer to protect data with.

But it's literally 6 times more expensive. Unraid is very good and offers everything I need, in many ways more flexible than the Synology. I prefer the way Unraid stores data to the traditional RAID options. Also, the hardware in the $90 Optiplex is much more powerful than the Synology, especially if I include an SSD cache. The only downside is that it's not going to look as nice and it'll consume a little more power, but not much more. A Raspberry Pi 4 would have been ideal for power consumption, but... I wanted to use Unraid, which requires x86.

How would it know (or care) that it booted from a USB attached SSD?

I guess you could use any USB storage device, but it doesn't make sense to use anything but a USB stick because it needs less than 1GB and it fully loads the OS into RAM immediately.

It is going to be a little better than the USB 3.0 hub you wanted just few days back.

I know, I'm so happy you guys prompted me to research this, it's definitely going to be better and won't break the bank.

 

[L&LD]

6x more expensive for 1000x more peace of mind. Sounds like a fair trade off to me.

The data isn't protected more by using your preferred storage method. Data needs just enough CPU performance, too much is wasted.

The sum of the parts is what makes a real NAS worth it. And the NAS units I've seen are just as usable today, for storing data safely, as when they were brand new a decade or more ago.

For the record, I would suggest QNAP, myself.

The best bang for the buck for a real NAS, particularly when it's on sale.

 

[Qbcd]

6x more expensive for 1000x more peace of mind. Sounds like a fair trade off to me.

The data isn't protected more by using your preferred storage method. Data needs just enough CPU performance, too much is wasted.

The sum of the parts is what makes a real NAS worth it. And the NAS units I've seen are just as usable today, for storing data safely, as when they were brand new a decade or more ago.

For the record, I would suggest QNAP, myself.

The best bang for the buck for a real NAS, particularly when it's on sale.

Well I disagree. I don't get any less peace of mind with Unraid. It uses 1 or 2 parity drives to protect 1 or 2 data drive failures, the rest of the drives are utilized fully and the data is not striped. Unraid can use VMs, transcoding, etc. so that's where the extra performance can be used, otherwise idle power is about 30W on the machine I bought which is similar to Synology or QNAP.

 

[L&LD]

You're allowed to disagree. But I would like to see an Unraid setup after 10 + years of 'neglect' and see how usable it is before I can pass further judgment.

The NAS box itself does cost a pretty penny, but the drives are the major investment for myself and most of my customers (4, 6, or 8x 14TB and larger drives do not make for a small investment). Not striped sounds like 'no performance' to me.

Standards in storage (which Qnap and Synology mostly adhere to) are more important than checkbox features for the long term.

It's not so much what you can do 'today' with it that is of interest to most with important data. It's what you can do tomorrow when the spit hits the fan.

 

[Qbcd]

You're allowed to disagree. But I would like to see an Unraid setup after 10 + years of 'neglect' and see how usable it is before I can pass further judgment.

The NAS box itself does cost a pretty penny, but the drives are the major investment for myself and most of my customers (4, 6, or 8x 14TB and larger drives do not make for a small investment). Not striped sounds like 'no performance' to me.

Standards in storage (which Qnap and Synology mostly adhere to) are more important than checkbox features for the long term.

It's not so much what you can do 'today' with it that is of interest to most with important data. It's what you can do tomorrow when the spit hits the fan.

Well I guess if you're doing a professional or enterprise deployment with drives that cost $500 each, then of course you'll go with specialized gear and ZFS, etc. But for a home setup, most people use shucked external drives, so dropping $500, $700 or $1000 on a NAS just makes no sense. Yes, so not striped indeed means lower performance, in fact with Unraid you are limited to single drive read speed and write is even slower because it has to always write to the parity drive(s) too, so it's literally 30-40 MB/s, which is why people get an SSD to act as a cache and that solves the problem. But the advantages are that you get to use 100% of drive capacity (minus the parity drive(s)), and you can add drives at will of varying sizes as long as they're equal to or smaller than your parity drive. So it's not performance-optimized, it's cost-optimized and data protection cost-optimized. You wouldn't wanna edit 8K video off of it, but if you just wanna share files and stream video, it's great. As far as reliability, I don't know if the hardware in a consumer Synology or QNAP NAS is more reliable than a Dell Optiplex or a $200 PC with new parts from reputable brands. But I could be wrong.

My point is, there are different NAS setups for different use cases, one isn't necessarily better than the other. Dropping $600 on a Synology NAS to put five $70 4TB drives in to stream movies to your TV is really wasteful, but people do it because they don't know any better. For their use case and mine, using an old PC with a reliable PSU is perfectly fine.

 

[Tech9]

But for a home setup, most people use shucked external drives

Yes, exactly the same drives for much less. Some people just don't know. Lately WD is using rebranded data center drives in Easystore products, so called WD White. They are marketed as 5400rpm class, but in fact are true 7200rpm drives with 2M hours MTBF. WD80EDAZ are common find, Ultrastar DC HC300-Series. Look at the USB 3.0 transfer speeds:

Build your Intel quad-core NAS box the way you know and let others pay for brand-names. Your DIY NAS will outperform $1000 products easily.

 

[Tech9]

Yes, so not striped indeed means lower performance

Not true, see the image above. It's a single drive. Gigabit LAN interface is the limit. You can upgrade it easily in DIY setup.

 

[Qbcd]

Yes, exactly the same drives for much less. Some people just don't know. Lately WD is using rebranded data center drives in Easystore products, so called WD White. They are marketed as 5400rpm class, but in fact are true 7200rpm drives with 2M hours MTBF. WD80EDAZ are common find, Ultrastar DC HC300-Series. Look at the USB 3.0 transfer speeds:

View attachment 34855
Build your Intel quad-core NAS box the way you know and let others pay for brand-names. Your DIY NAS will outperform $1000 products easily.

I agree. The Seagate Expansion 16TB drive is literally an Exo Enterprise drive for less than half the price. However, maybe they are like B-stock or something, and also they have much more limited warranties. But still well worth it for home users.

Not true, see the image above. It's a single drive. Gigabit LAN interface is the limit. You can upgrade it easily in DIY setup.

I was referring to the way Unraid handles writes. It's like 30-40MB/s because it has to coordinate with and write to a parity drive. But if you get like a 250GB or a 500GB SSD to act as cache, then you can max out your gigbabit connection as long as you don't fill up the cache.

 

[Tech9]

However, maybe they are like B-stock or something

Most expensive data center drives found their way in external enclosures due to recent drive shortages. The same drive in Easystore for $150 is available in computer stores for $280. One WD sells with 2y warranty, the other with 5y warranty. The drive itself is much cheaper and WD makes profit anyway.