NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Solved
using second drive as first drive in another RN10200
My query is similar to an existing thread https://community.netgear.com/t5/Using-your-ReadyNAS/Swapping-discs-in-a-pair-of-ReadyNAS-s-s/m-p/1094089#M110332 I wondered if it would work, to remove ...
basshead wrote:
The main purpose of the new ReadyNAS was to provide the redundancy achieved by using a second drive in the original ReadyNAS.
I get that, and I run jbod on my smaller NAS (which are used for backup). But you can't switch from raid-1 to jbod w/o destroying the volume. It would nice if you could, but the current firmware won't allow it.
So the volume will show up as degraded forever. And I don't think it will let you install a second disk as a new volume - it will want to restore the RAID-1 array.
basshead wrote:
It seems like a complicated process for little or no gain. One goal was to increase storage capacity before the existing volume fills up.
It is annoying, but the only way to cleanly do what you said you wanted to do. Which was (a) switch to jbod and also (b) replicate the current NAS volume onto the new one.
It's the conversion to jbod that's makes this messy - if you were running it already, it'd be simpler.
But you don't really have much data, going through these steps is perhaps 2 days (mostly waiting for backup jobs to complete).
basshead wrote:
Another solution could be to use the new ReadyNAS as a completely separate drive/volume, and distribute files between the two ReadyNASes accordingly (eg: keep music files on the old ReadyNAS, and all other files on the new ReadyNAS). The problem with this method is I don't have a backup of all files kept in a different physical location (ie: redundancy within the same ReadyNAS by use of a second drive doesn't protect against fire or theft).
Or just get two bigger drives for the new NAS, migrate the data, and rebulld the old NAS as the backup (two volume jbod). Then you can have the benefit of local RAID-1 and also have the benefit of disaster recovery.
It seems like a complicated process for little or no gain. One goal was to increase storage capacity before the existing volume fills up.
> But the volumes on both units would be degraded, and there is no way to fix that without installing a second drive in both units.
The main purpose of the new ReadyNAS was to provide the redundancy achieved by using a second drive in the original ReadyNAS.
Another solution could be to use the new ReadyNAS as a completely separate drive/volume, and distribute files between the two ReadyNASes accordingly (eg: keep music files on the old ReadyNAS, and all other files on the new ReadyNAS). The problem with this method is I don't have a backup of all files kept in a different physical location (ie: redundancy within the same ReadyNAS by use of a second drive doesn't protect against fire or theft).
basshead wrote:
The main purpose of the new ReadyNAS was to provide the redundancy achieved by using a second drive in the original ReadyNAS.
I get that, and I run jbod on my smaller NAS (which are used for backup). But you can't switch from raid-1 to jbod w/o destroying the volume. It would nice if you could, but the current firmware won't allow it.
So the volume will show up as degraded forever. And I don't think it will let you install a second disk as a new volume - it will want to restore the RAID-1 array.
basshead wrote:
It seems like a complicated process for little or no gain. One goal was to increase storage capacity before the existing volume fills up.
It is annoying, but the only way to cleanly do what you said you wanted to do. Which was (a) switch to jbod and also (b) replicate the current NAS volume onto the new one.
It's the conversion to jbod that's makes this messy - if you were running it already, it'd be simpler.
But you don't really have much data, going through these steps is perhaps 2 days (mostly waiting for backup jobs to complete).
basshead wrote:
Another solution could be to use the new ReadyNAS as a completely separate drive/volume, and distribute files between the two ReadyNASes accordingly (eg: keep music files on the old ReadyNAS, and all other files on the new ReadyNAS). The problem with this method is I don't have a backup of all files kept in a different physical location (ie: redundancy within the same ReadyNAS by use of a second drive doesn't protect against fire or theft).
Or just get two bigger drives for the new NAS, migrate the data, and rebulld the old NAS as the backup (two volume jbod). Then you can have the benefit of local RAID-1 and also have the benefit of disaster recovery.
StephenB wrote:Or just get two bigger drives for the new NAS, migrate the data, and rebulld the old NAS as the backup (two volume jbod). Then you can have the benefit of local RAID-1 and also have the benefit of disaster recovery.
That seems to be the best option; buy two 4TB drives (max the RN10200 can handle) and replace one existing 3TB drive with a new 4TB and once that's migrated, swap the other existing 3TB for a new 4TB. That will increase capacity to maximum of 4TB with redundancy, then use the new ReadyNAS with the two old 3TB drives configured as JBOD, providing 6TB of remote backup storage (of which only 4TB will actually be used, but no real problem there). By the time the 4TB fills up I'll consider further upgrade options (likely many years away before I need to think about it).
basshead wrote:
buy two 4TB drives (max the RN10200 can handle)
The RN102 will actually handle 8 TB drives, but sync times are pretty long if you have anyting bigger than 4 TB. 8 TB jbod works well though.
basshead wrote:
That seems to be the best option; buy two 4TB drives (max the RN10200 can handle) and replace one existing 3TB drive with a new 4TB and once that's migrated, swap the other existing 3TB for a new 4TB. That will increase capacity to maximum of 4TB with redundancy, then use the new ReadyNAS with the two old 3TB drives configured as JBOD, providing 6TB of remote backup storage (of which only 4TB will actually be used, but no real problem there). By the time the 4TB fills up I'll consider further upgrade options (likely many years away before I need to think about it).
Sounds best to me too. But you are planning a bit more more work than you need to do to get there. You can simply set up 2x4TB on the new nas, and rebuild the old. There's no need to upgrade the old system, and migrate the disks. You need to copy all the data to sync up the two NAS anyway, so there's no extra work there.
Also if you haven't purchased yet, check out pricing on the other 2-bay units (RN202, RN212, RN312). All are faster than the RN102. Something odd seems to be going on with the RN102 inventory/pricing at the moment. I'm seeing cheaper prices for the faster NAS.
StephenB wrote:Also if you haven't purchased yet, check out pricing on the other 2-bay units (RN202, RN212, RN312). All are faster than the RN102. Something odd seems to be going on with the RN102 inventory/pricing at the moment. I'm seeing cheaper prices for the faster NAS.
I have purchased the 102 already. I figured it must now be an old model as my usual supplier no longer stocked it. I can't remember how much I bought the first one for over 12 months ago, but I picked up the new one for less than $180. Looking at the 202, it's double the price, for double the speed (200Mbit/Gigabit ethernet) which isn't on my radar yet...
NETGEAR Academy
Boost your skills with the Netgear Academy - Get trained, certified and stay ahead with the latest Netgear technology!
Join Us!
