Upgrade of Synology DS209

[jimbob]

Hello

I have a small office which is currently using a Synology DS209 (2 bay) for hosting all our files (locally). We have it a couple of years but find it slow at times to open/save files. There are typically 4-5 pcs accessing files at any one time, the individual file sizes can be up to 30mb in size and we currently have about 250MB total storage requirement however this will probably increase to 1-2TB in the next few years.

I am considering purchasing a new NAS to improve performance however I am unsure if it will make a significant difference.
The Synology DS713+ looks promising but I am wondering if the improved specs and dual LAN connection makes a significant real-world difference or is it worth upgrading my current NAS at all.

I have looked at the performance figures but I find them difficult to decipher

I am also hoping the newer DSM will help me streamline how I organise and backup the files.

So, would the performance increases justify a NAS upgrade in my circumstances. Is there any other NAS I should be considering in that price bracket?

Many thanks for your advice!

 

[stevech]

Hello

I have a small office which is currently using a Synology DS209 (2 bay) for hosting all our files (locally). We have it a couple of years but find it slow at times to open/save files. There are typically 4-5 pcs accessing files at any one time, the individual file sizes can be up to 30mb in size and we currently have about 250MB total storage requirement however this will probably increase to 1-2TB in the next few years.

I am considering purchasing a new NAS to improve performance however I am unsure if it will make a significant difference.
The Synology DS713+ looks promising but I am wondering if the improved specs and dual LAN connection makes a significant real-world difference or is it worth upgrading my current NAS at all.

I have looked at the performance figures but I find them difficult to decipher

I am also hoping the newer DSM will help me streamline how I organise and backup the files.

So, would the performance increases justify a NAS upgrade in my circumstances. Is there any other NAS I should be considering in that price bracket?

Many thanks for your advice!

Is the LAN gigabit? And all PCs are gigabit? And none WiFi?
And, you're not doing big backups while users are working, right?

 

[jimbob]

Is the LAN gigabit? And all PCs are gigabit? And none WiFi?
And, you're not doing big backups while users are working, right?

I'm not sure about the LAN. The wiring is all relatively new (cat 5e?) however we have a switch that we had in a previous premesis that may be 10-15 years old. Is it possible that this is the weak link?
Though I can see the cpu usage being maxed sometimes out on the Synology when moving files.

All PCs are relatively new so I don't think they are the problem. All are wired, none are connected wirelessly. No backups being carried out during working hours.

Should replacement of switch be first priority?

 

[Shelbrain]

Cat 5E can support gigabit connections. If your switch is not gigabit then that may be a more cost effective upgrade in the interim to see if that improves things. Are you using a managed or unmanaged switch?

 

[jimbob]

I'd imagine it's unlikely to be gigabit due to its age. It's a basic unmanaged switch with 16 ports I think. I think I'll try a new unmanaged gigbit switch for now. I presume there are all basically the same or do I need to look out for anything in particular?

 

[stevech]

I'm not sure about the LAN. The wiring is all relatively new (cat 5e?) however we have a switch that we had in a previous premesis that may be 10-15 years old. Is it possible that this is the weak link?
Though I can see the cpu usage being maxed sometimes out on the Synology when moving files.

All PCs are relatively new so I don't think they are the problem. All are wired, none are connected wirelessly. No backups being carried out during working hours.

Should replacement of switch be first priority?

Replace that old slow switch with something like
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...27&cm_re=8_port_switch-_-33-122-111-_-Product

if 8 ports are too few, get two switches- cheaper than one 16 port.

Also, get all the users' computers updated to gigabit ethernet. The DS209 has gigE.

I'd start planning for a newer NAS; the circa 2009 DS209 is long in the tooth. You could get a newer Synology and run both, slowly migrate to avoid disruption. Be sure your backup strategy is robust and automated, with the 3-2-1 concept in backups.

 

[jimbob]

Thanks for the advice.

Ill go for a switch upgrade first before I look at the NAS.

All things being equal, would I see a significant difference in day-to-day performance between say my DS209 and a newer machine?

 

[stevech]

Switch upgrade - definitely. But are the PCs all using 10/100 rather than 1000BT (gigE)?

Yes, though it of course depends on what you buy. If you've done OK with a dual-bay, I'd stay with that, and not depend on RAID1.

The vendor's new software releases (DSM for Synology) will stop going back to old models at some point - like 5 or 6 years old. You should have a release like 4.3 now to catch the SSL security bug that hit so many systems.

 

[TonyH]

Hi,
As a 713+ (with upgraded memory) user with DX213 expansion box(total 8TB), I have been very happy. Suggest to read up on NAS reviews and ranking also.

 

[jimbob]

Thanks. Had a look at my current switch and its only 10/100.
I checked my network speed and am only getting 10 MB/80Mbps

I have a new TP-Link gigabit switch on order now so Ill see if that makes any significant difference.

 

[stevech]

Thanks. Had a look at my current switch and its only 10/100.
I checked my network speed and am only getting 10 MB/80Mbps

I have a new TP-Link gigabit switch on order now so Ill see if that makes any significant difference.

What speed are the PCs?

 

[jimbob]

They all have gigabit network speed

 

[stevech]

Assuming the CPs use the 100BT switch, changing to 1000BT will help PCs, but mostly only when they are moving large files. With small files, say, 50KB or so, overhead in file systems creation/open and SMB constrain the speeds.

 

[jimbob]

I installed the new Gigabit switch today. It seems to have made a small improvement on tranfer speeds.

I tried transferring a 300 MB file to the NAS and am now getting about 16MB/sec transfer speed (up from 10MB/sec).

The image below shows resouce monitor over about 5 minute time frame. The red line indicates where I tried transferring the files. There was no one else accessing the NAS at this time.

The CPU seems to be constantly running at 90% plus whether the NAS is being used or not. Is this normal? I dont think there are any other processes working in the background...

 

[jimbob]

I just checked the running processes and found that the antivirus was running and was taking up about 25% of CPU usage. It looks like it has been running for weeks.

Thankfully the CPU usage drop has improved performance a little but there is a process called 'smdb' still taking up 40-50% of CPU. Is this a normal background process or is it something that can be improved/removed?

 

[stevech]

For years now, on windows, I run Microsoft's free
Microsoft Security Essentials (MSE).
Who more than MS has an incentive to get MSE right?

It works and it has no noticeable penalty.

 

[TonyH]

Thanks for the advice.

Ill go for a switch upgrade first before I look at the NAS.

All things being equal, would I see a significant difference in day-to-day performance between say my DS209 and a newer machine?

Hi,
IMO, 209 does not have enough raw horse power to see noticeable improved
performance.