NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Solved
Likely Readynas 3-series
Hello,
I plan to upgrade from my ReadyNAS Duo that served me well for 5+ years running 2x2TB in Raid 1.
Consider to buy 2- or 4-bay (or even 6-bay hope not) NAS and it is for home use with small office.
I have questions concerning the advantage of separating data on different disks
or more software division in volumes and share provide enough separation.
Typically I need on the NAS for the coming years
A : Archive data - photos, media etc - accumulate over time does not change - about 1.5 GB growing
B : Backup of 3-4 Macs - need about 1 TB for that - change as backups do
C: Shared folders in the LAN - need about 0.1 TB for that - change a lot
D: Shared folders externally over internet with business clients - need about 0.2 TB for that - change a lot
- need encryption and security
E: Web-page - 0.01 TB or so - need internet security etc
Today I only have A-C but consider to expand the use with D and E with the new NAS
The old Duo likely will be the new backup destination.
Questions (after reading briefly in Readynas Software Manual 6.2):
1) Enabling bit-rot protection is mainly interesting for A and perhaps B
Should this be on typically 2 raid1 diska and physically separated from another 1-2 disks (for C-E)?
Hear that it should perhaps not be enabled where data is changed all the time
since that would lead to disk fragmentation, but I may misunderstand this.
2) Enabling encryption for a part D (for business sharing over internet) is that possible? and if so
recommended to have that for a separate disk? or enough with a separate volume on a disk
that is otherwise not encrypted?
3) Security against un-friendly internet access. Consider to house a web-page or two on the NAS
but worried for that it opens up for attacks from outside. Does it help in anyway to
have such stuff on a separate disk? or enough with separate volume?
4) I know the volume can be divided up in shares and each share can be password protected
and so I actually work today. Is there any advantage of dividing more physical into separate disks
or share separation is enough? So would a 2-bay system with shares for A-E give about
the same integrity, security, performance?
5) I read in the manual that enabling checksum and bit-rot protection decrease performance.
If i have I have 2 disks raid1 configured and divide into two volume one with checksum and bit-protection
enabled and the other without, will they then have different performance? Or do I need to
have the volume without checksum and bit-rot-protection on a separate disk to get the performance gain?
b) Same question for disk fragmentation?
6) Last question Is the limitation to 4TB disks on 3-series a hardware or software-constraint, i.e.
can a future upgrade of OS 6 open up for larger disks?
Generally speaking I do not think performance is an issue. My focus is mainly on data-integrity and
internet security if I open up for internet access option D and E above.
The questions span a large range and would appreciate also partial response.
Thanks
I plan to upgrade from my ReadyNAS Duo that served me well for 5+ years running 2x2TB in Raid 1.
Consider to buy 2- or 4-bay (or even 6-bay hope not) NAS and it is for home use with small office.
I have questions concerning the advantage of separating data on different disks
or more software division in volumes and share provide enough separation.
Typically I need on the NAS for the coming years
A : Archive data - photos, media etc - accumulate over time does not change - about 1.5 GB growing
B : Backup of 3-4 Macs - need about 1 TB for that - change as backups do
C: Shared folders in the LAN - need about 0.1 TB for that - change a lot
D: Shared folders externally over internet with business clients - need about 0.2 TB for that - change a lot
- need encryption and security
E: Web-page - 0.01 TB or so - need internet security etc
Today I only have A-C but consider to expand the use with D and E with the new NAS
The old Duo likely will be the new backup destination.
Questions (after reading briefly in Readynas Software Manual 6.2):
1) Enabling bit-rot protection is mainly interesting for A and perhaps B
Should this be on typically 2 raid1 diska and physically separated from another 1-2 disks (for C-E)?
Hear that it should perhaps not be enabled where data is changed all the time
since that would lead to disk fragmentation, but I may misunderstand this.
2) Enabling encryption for a part D (for business sharing over internet) is that possible? and if so
recommended to have that for a separate disk? or enough with a separate volume on a disk
that is otherwise not encrypted?
3) Security against un-friendly internet access. Consider to house a web-page or two on the NAS
but worried for that it opens up for attacks from outside. Does it help in anyway to
have such stuff on a separate disk? or enough with separate volume?
4) I know the volume can be divided up in shares and each share can be password protected
and so I actually work today. Is there any advantage of dividing more physical into separate disks
or share separation is enough? So would a 2-bay system with shares for A-E give about
the same integrity, security, performance?
5) I read in the manual that enabling checksum and bit-rot protection decrease performance.
If i have I have 2 disks raid1 configured and divide into two volume one with checksum and bit-protection
enabled and the other without, will they then have different performance? Or do I need to
have the volume without checksum and bit-rot-protection on a separate disk to get the performance gain?
b) Same question for disk fragmentation?
6) Last question Is the limitation to 4TB disks on 3-series a hardware or software-constraint, i.e.
can a future upgrade of OS 6 open up for larger disks?
Generally speaking I do not think performance is an issue. My focus is mainly on data-integrity and
internet security if I open up for internet access option D and E above.
The questions span a large range and would appreciate also partial response.
Thanks
You could put a suggestion in the Feature Request & Feedback subforum.
You could also make a request at rnxtras.com (not a netgear site)
28 Replies
Replies have been turned off for this discussion
StephenB wrote:
No issue here with quoting prices, though if a seller were to abuse that I'd at least warn them, or possibly ban. Not sure what other mods would do. Overall, policies here are quite permissive.CLHatch wrote: Don't know what the policy of "advertising" retailers in public is
Amazon US pricing today has a gap of only $40 between the RN314 and the RN316 (both diskless). That makes going with the 316 a no-brainer.
The gap between the RN312 and the RN316 is $140, so budget for home users might start to kick in there. Though if you look at the analysis I posted earlier, you recover that extra money (and more) the first time you need to expand your storage.
Mdgm replied, but the more succinct answer is "no".janpeter wrote: I guess this link is relevant https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/RAID56 right?
BTRFS has some experimental features that integrate RAID into the file system itself. They are interesting for the future, but not ready yet - and Netgear isn't using them.
OK, good to know. Yes, seemed like a no-brainer to me as well, since I was already looking at the RN314. Reason I went for the RN316.
The Amazon link is : http://www.amazon.com/NETGEAR-ReadyNAS-Attached-Diskless-RN31600-100NAS/dp/B00BNI4EYG
That one is currently $554.99 with free shipping, although you have to pay tax, which brings the price up above $600.
Cheaper, and where I bought it from was here: http://www.nextwarehouse.com/item/?1378932
That one is currently $572.47 with free shipping, but no tax. You can also pay for faster shipping, which still ends up being cheaper than from Amazon after having to pay for tax. Get a "credit" if you go for the paid shipping also. I went that route, to later buy another hard disk from them to put in the RN316.
Edit:
Oh, if you live in CA or MA, you have to pay for tax when ordering through NextWarehouse also... in that case, Amazon ends up being a better deal.- Thanks a lot again!
I want to round of this topic with a couple of questions concerning performance and stretching upwards.
1) I wonder how big role has the ECC RAM-memory for data integrity, which comes with upgrade to 5-series. I understand it improves somehow the bit-rot protection and more. Would be good with some brief explanation of reference to where it can be found.
2) I consider more use of PLEX for media handling which I today mainly do through a Mac mini in our network. I have seen in PLEX documentation that 3-series work well although here are some limitations around video-streaming. My idea is that I should continue to run PLEX from Mac mini but “integrate” ReadyNAS better with it and use ISCSI-connection or similar. Is this a fruitful path for readynas 3-series or much better to climb to 5-series?
3) I work regularly with VirtualBox on my Mac and seen that it can also be run on ReadyNAS at least the ones with stronger processor. Just wonder if 3-series atom processer can work with VirtualBox and appreciate some links. Or also here if you really need to climb to 5-series.
ECC RAM is a must-have in data center servers.janpeter wrote: 1) I wonder how big role has the ECC RAM-memory for data integrity, which comes with upgrade to 5-series. I understand it improves somehow the bit-rot protection and more. Would be good with some brief explanation of reference to where it can be found...
The main thing to keep in mind is that bit-rot protection in ZFS and BTRFS protects the data on the disk. It doesn't protect the data while its in RAM (either on the way to the disk on a write, or on the way to the user after a read). Clear evidence of true "bit rot" is pretty hard to find, but everyone agrees that memory errors in data centers occur (the ECC memory reports them!).
Memory failures are relatively rare, but when one does occur the odds of it resulting in data corruption is about 10%. That is based on this study: http://research.cs.wisc.edu/adsl/Public ... fast10.pdf). This particular study focuses on ZFS, but potentially is applicable to BTRFS as well (since AFAIK neither implementation guards against memory failure). In a file server application, about 3.6% of the time a single bit flip resulted in corrupted writing of the data. Odds of a corrupted read was about 7%.
How much this matters depends on how frequent memory failures actually are. There are a couple of studies on these failures, but I find it difficult to draw any simple conclusions from them - other than that memory failures do occur, and that ECC fixes almost all of them. One of those studies is here: http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~bianca/paper ... rics09.pdf
I don't have a NAS with ECC memory myself. FWIW bit rot has never been reported in my RN102 or my RN202, and I don't have any clear evidence of data corruption in any of my NAS from any cause.- 2) I wouldn't use iSCSI for this
3) The 300 series lacks VT-x, so it won't run 64-bit VMs. The 516 has VT-x.
Me either. Though truthfully I don't use iSCSI at all.mdgm wrote: 2) I wouldn't use iSCSI for this
Keeping your media in ordinary shares gives you more options. For instance you can also play your media directly from the NAS from another PC or media player (iSCSI is designed for only one client at a time). You can even run plex on both the NAS and the Mac Mini (sharing the same media library).- Thanks.
1) So little incentive for small office home to invest in ECC memory I guess?
I work in the life science sector and people working with databases for genetic material etc
are usually very keen to ensure ECC memory and often use ZFS systems.
But I have not much of this kind of data on my desk.
2) iSCSI - can you sketch roughly what the main problem is with letting an aged Mac mini
stand for the CPU-power and ReadyNAS 3-series for the storage of media using Plex?
Much better to let ReadyNAS be the Plex-server in a stand alone way?
3) Virtual box - so 32-bit VMs would work I understand your comment as.
Good enough for me. Just want to be able to learn the technique and
see if can be useful from a central NAS in some way.
For heavier work I naturally run VirtualBox locally on my laptop or so.
Some high-end workstations support ECC memory, though generally it is a server feature. It does cost more, so Netgear choose to use it only on the high-end NAS. So you'd need an RN516 to get it (RN700 has it as well).janpeter wrote:
1) So little incentive for small office home to invest in ECC memory I guess?
I work in the life science sector and people working with databases for genetic material etc
are usually very keen to ensure ECC memory and often use ZFS systems.
But I have not much of this kind of data on my desk.
You can do this. We are just saying that iSCSI isn't the way we would do it. You can set up Plex to access the media even if it is in a normal share. Just mount the share on the mini.janpeter wrote: 2) iSCSI - can you sketch roughly what the main problem is with letting an aged Mac mini
stand for the CPU-power and ReadyNAS 3-series for the storage of media using Plex?
Much better to let ReadyNAS be the Plex-server in a stand alone way?
FWIW Plex on my RN200 works quite well, and can transcode 720p acceptably. I suspect the 300 would be at least that good, though the 500 would be better still (giving you a second reason to go for it).janpeter wrote:
I work in the life science sector and people working with databases for genetic material etc
are usually very keen to ensure ECC memory and often use ZFS systems.
Our ReadyDATA devices use both ECC memory and ZFS. However you can't run Plex Media Server on a ReadyDATA. I think a ReadyDATA would probably be overkill for your media collection.
The ReadyNAS 516 and 716X both have ECC memory. It is nice to have.janpeter wrote:
3) Virtual box - so 32-bit VMs would work I understand your comment as.
Yes, however with just 2GB RAM in the 300 series system you are going to be quite limited in what you can run.- Yes, ReadyDATA would be over-kill.
Can you expand on the usefulness of ECC memory?
I tend to relate ECC memory to how OS6 deals with data integrity when backup of the NAS is done to an external HD or another NAS. I read around page 220 and forwards in the OS 6 manual but I cannot find the information I want.
1) Does OS6 provide possibility to format an external HD in BTRFS and in this way ensure that data integrity is kept?
2) Does the backup system perhaps need to be under OS6 also in order to get the whole system NAS and its regular backup procedure to be safe against bit-rot?
3) Is ECC memory a key component to make the system NAS and regular backup safe against bit-rot?
4) Is there other reasons than to avoid bit-rot that motivates investment in ECC memory?
I think its all been said. Memory errors can result in server crashes and unpredictable behavior. Sometimes that unpredictable behavior corrupts the data (and bitrot protection will almost never prevent it). ECC memory basically eliminates the threat of memory errors having those bad consequences. Whether its worth the money depends on how big you think the risk is, and how big the economic consequences of the unpredictable behavior are.janpeter wrote: Can you expand on the usefulness of ECC memory?
ECC isn't coupled with bitrot protection. Servers all over the world use it, and most of them aren't running btrfs or zfs.
No it doesn't. And Netgear's bitrot protection depends on RAID, which isn't on the external disk.janpeter wrote: 1) Does OS6 provide possibility to format an external HD in BTRFS and in this way ensure that data integrity is kept?
There are maybe two questions here. The backup system does not need to be OS6. And the NAS does not protect the backups from bitrot. I suggest multiple backups myself.janpeter wrote: 2) Does the backup system perhaps need to be under OS6 also in order to get the whole system NAS and its regular backup procedure to be safe against bit-rot?
Answered above.janpeter wrote: 3) Is ECC memory a key component to make the system NAS and regular backup safe against bit-rot?
4) Is there other reasons than to avoid bit-rot that motivates investment in ECC memory?- Hi again,I would like to change focus on my last question from ECC memory to integrity of backup which is the key question. And sure I admit I do not understand ECC-memory and BTRFS well enough and may questions maybe obscure.I do understand that BTRFS is very useful if you interact with the NAS to some extent, but too much then you get disk fragmentation. Right now I am more interested in the low frequency of interaction that you have for an archive, i.e. mainly reading files and occasionally adding files in accumulative way. In this context bit-rot protection (BTRFS and raid-configuration) gives added value especially if we consider storage over long time, say 5-10 years and more.Central to long term archive is of course to have an external backup procedure that maintain the data integrity you have in the primary storage, the NAS with BTRFS. I see some alternatives with: external HD, another NAS (for me older ReadyNAS with “OS4” and EXT3/4), or even a newer NAS under OS6. These different backup solutions have different levels of long time security of data integrity. But right now I think just of the short term backup-procedure.1) When a file is backed up externally, what ensure that the backup is correct and that a recovery will give back the correct file?a) I think of incremental backup. I thought that the use of checksum that can be enabled in OS6 and BTRFS also could be used somehow for external backup. I guess that if you do backup to another ReadyNAS under OS6 you might be able to exploit some usage of these checksums to ensure that the (incremental) backup/recovery is correct. Is that true?b) Use of checksums (or something else) perhaps can be used even if backup is made to a non-BTRFS media?c) Is here some difference in this aspect using the standards built in backup procedure in OS6 compared with for instance rsync or some other backup-software that can be used?2) In this context of making backup/recovery I guess that ECC-memory provides an extra level to ensure data integrity when doing backup/recovery - or do I misunderstand this?3) Would you say that ECC-memory is mainly interesting for intensive use of NAS as server rather than the low intensity use of NAS as archive?Thus, as a user I wold like to be able to say that once the file is in the archive NAS then data integrity will be kept both at the primary NAS, during backup/recover to external site, and at the backup site.---See that in the new FORUM it is my responsibility to close the discussion and I think we are soon there.
janpeter1 wrote:
I do understand that BTRFS is very useful if you interact with the NAS to some extent, but too much then you get disk fragmentation. Right now I am more interested in the low frequency of interaction that you have for an archive, i.e. mainly reading files and occasionally adding files in accumulative way. In this context bit-rot protection (BTRFS and raid-configuration) gives added value especially if we consider storage over long time, say 5-10 years and more.If this is your main use, then you won't see much (if any) disk fragmentation with btrfs.1) When a file is backed up externally, what ensure that the backup is correct and that a recovery will give back the correct file?I've never seen a case where a backup / restore failed silently - usually there's an error reported (either by the disk or by the backup utility). That is not to say that "silent bitrot" is impossible. Just that if it has happened to me I didn't discover it later.This is obviously very important to you. So I'd suggest that you put in place your own methods of validating data integrity, and not rely exclusively on the file system or RAID.There are tools that verify when you copy (teracopy is one example). Ensuring that the restore done years later gives back precisely the original file likely requires saving an independent checksum to verify. I do this manually with some media files (creating an SFV file that checksums all the files in the folder).a) I think of incremental backup. I thought that the use of checksum that can be enabled in OS6 and BTRFS also could be used somehow for external backup. I guess that if you do backup to another ReadyNAS under OS6 you might be able to exploit some usage of these checksums to ensure that the (incremental) backup/recovery is correct. Is that true?Well, the checksum is verified when you copy to the backup. But the checksum is purely local, so another ReadyNAS doesn't see it, and cannot use it. BTRFS isn't supported right now on the external USB drives, so the checksum isn't computed on the USB drive either.b) Use of checksums (or something else) perhaps can be used even if backup is made to a non-BTRFS media?As I mentioned above, there are tools available that can do this. But the ReadyNAS doesn't (and no other NAS does either).c) Is here some difference in this aspect using the standards built in backup procedure in OS6 compared with for instance rsync or some other backup-software that can be used?I think I addressed this above.2) In this context of making backup/recovery I guess that ECC-memory provides an extra level to ensure data integrity when doing backup/recovery - or do I misunderstand this?3) Would you say that ECC-memory is mainly interesting for intensive use of NAS as server rather than the low intensity use of NAS as archive?I wouldn't say that ECC is related to intensive use. ECC-memory increases reliability for both applications. Clearly that's a particularly important aspect for you, so you should probably consider a NAS that supports it.Thus, as a user I wold like to be able to say that once the file is in the archive NAS then data integrity will be kept both at the primary NAS, during backup/recover to external site, and at the backup site.My main advice is that there is always some risk, and at some point you need to accept it. I think you will need to put some of your own measures in place in order to help ensure that your own data integrity threshold is met.My own approach is multiple copies (I maintain 2 local independent backups of all data, and a fourth copy on a cloud backup server). That doesn't alert me if one copy is somehow corrupted, but it does give me some recovery options if I discover that down the road. I'm not saying that will work for you. But you'll need to sort out what measures are enough.
NETGEAR Academy
Boost your skills with the Netgear Academy - Get trained, certified and stay ahead with the latest Netgear technology!
Join Us!
