Server or Nas for 10-person Architectural Firm

[cellophane]

After reading a bit on various networked storage options (NAS / Server) I'm not quite sure what would be the best option or if I am even approaching the issue correctly. I did read the sticky and the SOHO'S Don't Raid article but I guess I'm slow, or more likely just out of touch with such issues.

Anyhow - We are a small architecture firm with a very loosely assembled network (no domain servers or anything like that) and are running into issues with our current set-up and as such - its time to try to correct it. The current config is:

WinXP
2g Ram
Raid 1 - 250GB
Additional drive -700GB
Both drives are overflowing.
Netgear FVS318
16 port switch (no clue what brand)
Most Common File types:* AutoCAD, Revit, Photoshop, Word, Excel, Quickbooks, SketchUP, Photos

Our main "network" drive is just a file share on the main drive of the XP machine. The machine also has our scanner / printer attached to it (Brother MFC 8xxx) via a serial cable (not-USB.) Backups are handled by external drives that run an incremental every night and a full backup about once a week. The full backup is manual - I can't convince the boss to go for something more robust... (he can be cheap.) The biggest issue we have other than space is the limit on the number of people who can access a share through XP. I know both a NAS & Server system would take care of the access problem. It would be super awesome if we could set up a FTP share and have clients & subs connect directly instead of the overly cumbersome web-interface we have now - but I know that may be beyond the scope of this site (although if someone has info I'd love it ) I'd also like to try and get us over to Basecamp or Sitefolio to help streamline but that is probably a pipe-dream as well.

So - all that said I have no idea if a NAS or new Server would be the best use of resources.

Thanks

 

[Gooberface]

I must admit, that my first thought was pity. I wouldn´t want to fill your shoes with the tasks at hand.

My blood freezes cold when I read stories like yours.

First of all, you really, really, really should get a decent server, something like Essential Business Server would be a viable solution.

Second, GET A BACKUP-SYSTEM........ or get an online solution. Bandwith is in most cases not an issues, since most online backup´s are incremental or differential. Only once a week, is it necessary to make a full backup.

Thirdly, make your boss understand, that IT is the NERVE of his business. How much would it cost him, if the building burned ? No reliable backups to recover from...... he is basically "scr....d". How many man-hours has been put in just ONE single drawing ?

Otherwise...... at least get TWO NAS´es..... both equally equipped..... put one at your work and the other one in your Boss´s house...... and make them replicate. That way, you should always have a full copy of all files.

I am sure, if you read the excellent reviews here, you can find a model that fits. As a tip, give your boss two options....... first option is the one you really want. Second option is a more expensive and "chromed" option..... when he notices the difference in price, he will opt for the cheapest..... which is the one you want Just an old salesman´s trick

 

[claykin]

Agreed, however Essential Business Server was discontinued July 1, 2010. If your office doesn't need Exchange, maybe just get Server 2008 R2 Std edition. Even if you wanted Exchange capabilities, it would likely be less expensive in the long haul if you used a hosted Exchange solution. Godaddy, Intermedia, etc...

Server will provide you with a host of advantages. Granular control of security on each system, control of credentials, Active Directory, snapshots, management of Windows Updates, etc......

Get the LAN adapter from Brother for that MFC (or buy a new one that includes LAN connection) and stop using an XP desktop as a printer share. You are losing functionality and likely don't have access to all MFC functions, such as scanning with your current connection (BTW, its parallel, not serial).

Server will allow you to centralize your data (or copies of it) and perform backups in one place. Get a good backup solution and consider cloud backup for belt and suspenders. I use Jungledisk and have been more than satisfied with their cloud service. Jungledisk not only allows full and incremental backups, it also does delta file backup (only changed bits in files are backed up) and deduplication (same file in multiple directories only requires one backup of that file).

Basically, it would be wise to consult with a professional IT consultant in your area.

 

[cellophane]

Unfortunately you are both preaching to the choir... Like they say, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. I however am not an IT specialist, I'm an architect that dabbles with computers and as a result am the "IT Department" here.

I do appreciate the feedback however and will certainly try to get some things remedied. I have pushed for an online backup before and was basically tossed out on my ear. Why pay for it when you can copy it manually once a week right? Jungledisk looks good though, about half what some other services were quoting. I'll bring it back up.

Thanks again.

 

[claykin]

Sounds like your boss needs to be a victim of data loss or a serious outage where it will cost him $$ in productivity. Then he'll have his ah ha.

Sad.

 

[cellophane]

Sounds like your boss needs to be a victim of data loss or a serious outage where it will cost him $$ in productivity. Then he'll have his ah ha.

Sad.

That is the unfortunate conclusion I came to a while ago... We went through 4 or 5 of those MyBook drives (our daily & full backups at the time) before he bought something else.

On the upside those Synology systems look pretty sweet. I might have to get one for myself!

 

[cellophane]

What is the advantage to having a Server OS / System in addition to a NAS? I did get him to go for a NAS after some issues today but I don't know enough about the advantages of having a server...

Also - Recomendation for a NAS system? I'm looking at the following:

Synology DS410
Synology DS210+
Synology Disk Station DS410J

 

[HDClown]

You need to look at budget. An off-the-shelf NAS from Synology or QNAP, with drives, will be a GOOD bit cheaper than an off-the-shelf server. I do small business IT consulting for a living, and I DO NOT recommend custom building something, unless you want a lot of headache.

I just configured a Dell T110 with 4GB RAM, 4x1TB drive, RAID5 (using software RAID controller, only option in this model), and Server 2008 R2 with 5 CALs and it came out to $3100.

You can put together a NAS with 4x2TB enterprise grade drives for $2000. That's 2x as much storage for $1000 cheaper. If you want 4x2TB drives in the Dell server, the price of the server is now $4200. You should also be buying another 5 CALs to be legal, since you have 10 users.

Additionally, you will have imlementation costs of a server (unless you are saavy enough to get that going yourself). A NAS is very easy to DIY.

So, why buy a server? #1 on my list is Support. It's vastly superior to what Thecus, Synology, QNAP, etc. offer. You can pay extra for 24x7x365 OnSite support (prices above are 5x10 M-F OnSite), so someone elses replaces parts if they break, and you can have them quick. No need to maintain that internally.

Another big one is security control. NTFS offers vastly superior file control when compared to Linux/Samba on these kind of NAS devices. You can also start looking at deploying a domain and gaining more control over the desktops as well. Lots of possibilities here, but likely not anything you would want to (even if you could) maintain yourself. Because hey, you're an architect not an IT professional. And I see it ALL the time where a guy in the office was the 'IT guy' because he "knew come computer stuff" and the next thing you know, there are some major network and server issues. All of this has a cost figure associated with it.

So, as I originally said, look at a budget first.

If you just want to gain some better coverage on your file system side, an off-the-shelf NAS would easily handle that. You want to look at x86 based NAS models only. You want to focus on some models like so. Anything under this will not give you the performance you are going to want given the size that architectural files can be.

Synology DS411+ / DS1010+
QNAP TS-459 Pro / TS-559 Pro / TS-669 Pro

Expect to spend about $1500-2000 for a solution like this. You also need to look at backups. Either 2 NAS, external USB disk, online, etc. If there isn't even a $2k budget, the boss needs to thing HARD. If there is a budget for more then this. You should consult with IT professionals IMO.

 

[cellophane]

If you just want to gain some better coverage on your file system side, an off-the-shelf NAS would easily handle that. You want to look at x86 based NAS models only. You want to focus on some models like so. Anything under this will not give you the performance you are going to want given the size that architectural files can be.

Synology DS411+ / DS1010+
QNAP TS-459 Pro / TS-559 Pro / TS-669 Pro

When you say "performance you are going to want" that essentialy relates to how quickly the NAS / Server can access and process information in the files and relay it to the client or is there more to it? I know disk speed and connection (SATA / IDE etc) affects that - I'd guess the NAS processor also?

 

[HDClown]

When you say "performance you are going to want" that essentialy relates to how quickly the NAS / Server can access and process information in the files and relay it to the client or is there more to it? I know disk speed and connection (SATA / IDE etc) affects that - I'd guess the NAS processor also?

There are two thing sin play, sustained transfer speed, and # of connections.
The NAS models you are looking at run software RAID on Linux. Software RAID is reliant on the processor. The faster the processor, the faster it can handle the RAID operations which means faster sustained speeds Additionally, the faster the processor, the more users the device can handle simultaneously, while also maintaing that fast speed.

Your internal network needs to be considered as well. A 100meg ethernet network only pushes 12.5MB/s per client MAX, and that's easy for even low end NAS units to handle for a couple users. But if you have a GigE network, you can now push 125MB/sec per user, which is a lot for a NAS to handle.

Synology has a good chart to reference:

http://download.synology.com/download/performance/20100716/perf_chart_4-5_netbench.jpg
(note that the DS410j performs a little worse than the RS409 and DS409slim)

This shows you # of clients and Mbps. You'll see that the at 6 simultaneously clients, a bunch of those models peek. But the larger models with the Intel Atom processors keep growing in their throughput capacity as client count grows.

Do you need the extra speed? Only you can determine that based on how much sustained transfer and simultaneous usage you expect to see in the environment. Something like a Synology DS410 / QNAP TS-419P in the $500 bracket might be plenty. The DS411+ puts you into $650 bracket, and then you go to $800-900 for QNAP TS-439 Pro II/TS-459 Pro

QNAP has a higher price premium than Synology in general. Some of this is due to the fact that QNAP uses all metal for their cases/drive bays, while Synology uses all plastic. QNAP also tends to have more USB/eSATA ports on their devices, all which add to the cost.

In terms of QNAP vs. Synology comparison model wise, it's like so:

Synology DS410 | QNAP TS-419P
Synology DS411+ | QNAP TS-459 Pro
Synology DS1010+ | QNAP TS-559 Pro

Thecus N5500 and 7700 are also some good options. Thecus units tend to cost less than Synology and QNAP at the same performance level. I just don't know a whole lot about their GUI, firmware history, support, community, etc.

2 bay models would be something like

Synology DS210+ | QNAP TS-219P
Synology DX710 | QNAP TS-259 Pro

 

[claykin]

There's so many more reasons to consider W2K8 server. Workstation login credential management, security/rights management, Windows update management, centralizing data storage, snapshots, etc.... Read up on W2K8 Server on Microsoft's site and/or Wikipedia.

Consider a server running hardware RAID 1 and a NAS capable of Active Directory and iSCSI. The NAS shares can handle excess storage requirements and iSCSI can provide a storage pool for server apps that require a local disk.

You'll want to budget about $5-6K for this project and thats not including someone qualified to setup the server, NAS and backups. Don't forget backups!!! Also UPS units that will communicate with the server and NAS to properly shutdown in the event of a power failure while no one is onsite. APC $60 consumer UPS is fine for the NAS and you can get away with a 1300VA consumer UPS for the Server (about $150). Stick with APC for reliability, cost and good communication with the hardware.

Look @ the Dell T310 server and Netgear Readynas Pro or NVX.

Of course there's other things such as network switches and external backup device that are not included in my estimate. This could easily run up to $10K but the end result should ultimately be worth it in improved productivity, access to data, and less downtime.

My 2 cents.

 

[cellophane]

Ordered a DS411+ with 2-2TB drives yesterday. Hopefully the set-up process goes well. For the time being a server isn't really an option but I'll keep trying. Baby steps right?

Thanks for all the help! I'm sure I'll have more questions once everything is up and running.

 

[claykin]

DS-411+ should be a good choice.

Did you choose disks from the Synology compatibility list? http://www.synology.com/us/products/compatibility.php

 

[cellophane]

DS-411+ should be a good choice.

Did you choose disks from the Synology compatibility list? http://www.synology.com/us/products/compatibility.php

Sure did.

10 char min...

 

[SoftDux-Rudi]

Don't take this the wrong way, but you should compare apples to apples, not pineapples.

You need to look at budget. An off-the-shelf NAS from Synology or QNAP, with drives, will be a GOOD bit cheaper than an off-the-shelf server. I do small business IT consulting for a living, and I DO NOT recommend custom building something, unless you want a lot of headache.

Depends what you get. Thecus, QNAP, etc can't be compared will DELL, neither in their hardware or support. Netgear can, to a large degree - well, in our country at least. I often get better support from Duxbury (our Netgear wholesaler) than Dell. Support is quicker and I've had less downtime with Netgear than Dell servers.

I just configured a Dell T110 with 4GB RAM, 4x1TB drive, RAID5 (using software RAID controller, only option in this model), and Server 2008 R2 with 5 CALs and it came out to $3100.

You can put together a NAS with 4x2TB enterprise grade drives for $2000. That's 2x as much storage for $1000 cheaper. If you want 4x2TB drives in the Dell server, the price of the server is now $4200. You should also be buying another 5 CALs to be legal, since you have 10 users.

Most NAS devices will run a form of Linux, so take Windows off your Server quote and you'll have a much cheaper server.
For the price you quoted, the Dell will probably be a Dual / Quad core with 4GB+ ECC RAM and onboard RAID as well. The NAS devices you compared it with generally has an Atom, or Dual Core (Thecus 8800PRO) CPU and 1GB RAM DDRII non-ECC RAM.
Will this Dell server have redundant power, hot swap supplies and hot swap drives?
Does the Dell server have NIC bonding / failover / load balancing?

Additionally, you will have imlementation costs of a server (unless you are saavy enough to get that going yourself). A NAS is very easy to DIY.

So, why buy a server? #1 on my list is Support. It's vastly superior to what Thecus, Synology, QNAP, etc. offer. You can pay extra for 24x7x365 OnSite support (prices above are 5x10 M-F OnSite), so someone elses replaces parts if they break, and you can have them quick. No need to maintain that internally.

The bigger NAS and SAN suppliers will have the same support, which you also pay for

Another big one is security control. NTFS offers vastly superior file control when compared to Linux/Samba on these kind of NAS devices.

Uhm, how does NTFS compare to SMB? NTFS is Window's file system format and SMB/Samba is Windows' network share protocol.
SMB is a protocol, originally developed by Windows and later introduced to Linux for compatibility.

Linux uses many file systems, of which EXT3 / EXT4 / XFS are the more common used ones and they actually provide far better security and stability than NTFS. Why one earth would one ever actually defrag a hard drive? Only on Windows systems is this necessary to improve speed. Linux file systems are already optimized

You can also start looking at deploying a domain and gaining more control over the desktops as well. Lots of possibilities here, but likely not anything you would want to (even if you could) maintain yourself. Because hey, you're an architect not an IT professional. And I see it ALL the time where a guy in the office was the 'IT guy' because he "knew come computer stuff" and the next thing you know, there are some major network and server issues. All of this has a cost figure associated with it.

Chances are the same "IT guy" will run into the same problems on the Windows 2008 server as well, especially when it comes to ACL, Domain Controllers, etc. If he doesn't have the training needs on the product he wants to buy, regardless if it's a Windows server, Linux server or NetApp SAN, he will mess up sooner or later and still have the same issues.

So, as I originally said, look at a budget first.

If you just want to gain some better coverage on your file system side, an off-the-shelf NAS would easily handle that. You want to look at x86 based NAS models only. You want to focus on some models like so. Anything under this will not give you the performance you are going to want given the size that architectural files can be.

Synology DS411+ / DS1010+
QNAP TS-459 Pro / TS-559 Pro / TS-669 Pro

Expect to spend about $1500-2000 for a solution like this. You also need to look at backups. Either 2 NAS, external USB disk, online, etc. If there isn't even a $2k budget, the boss needs to thing HARD. If there is a budget for more then this. You should consult with IT professionals IMO.

External USB HDD's are good for backups, but limited in speed and size. Depending on how much data you need, a second NAS device would be better. Most NAS devices can also automatically synchronize the data between each other so if one fails then it's a simple matter of redirecting clients to the other one, or change their IP's. Most NAS devices will also automatically rebuild a degraded RAID array should a drive fail and you put a new drive in. And, most NAS's can do online RAID migration, which is handy if you add more / larger drives later on. Windows, AFAIK can't do this without a lot of extra work. With most NAS's you just tell it to migrate or enlarge the RAID array.





In general, for a solution like this, a self-build server with something like OpenFiler / FreeNAS (depending on what you prefer) would be the cheapest since you already probably have some of the hardware. Even if not, you could build a rather affordable Intel based (i.e. Intel motherboard, Intel NIC, Intel CPU, etc) server for a low budget, add a few enterprise drives ( you can often get enterprise drives cheaper from suppliers than from Dell / HP / IBM / etc) for redundancy and speed. For better reliability you could use Intel / SuperMicro / HP / IBM / Dell / Sun (they get more expensive in this order, generally) server hardware, i.e. server motherboard, ECC RAM, server CPU, hardware RAID controllers, etc.

FreeNAS, OpenFiler, Nexenta, etc are all free NAS distributions which you can install and forget about. Some of our OpenFiler NAS's have been running for more than 7 years now. They haven't been replaced with newer hardware yet since it wasn't necessary. The machines all have 12 hot swap drive cages running 500GB IDE HDD's. Some run on 146GB SCSI drives as well. And they often outlast our Dell servers. We moved over to SuperMicro for our hosting clients 3 years ago and I'm very impressive with SuperMicro.