Need Hardware Recommendation

[consultant]

I need a storage solution with 16TB capacity to connect to an Ubuntu server. This is just for server user data file backup and all users store their files on the server so I don't need to backup over the network so thinking probably USB 3.1 connection would be adequate. I've already have server redundancy so RAID-10 would overkill. Could get more storage from the drives using RAID-5. Small business with limited budget. Cany anyone recommend a storage device that works well (or comes with) FreeNAS that fits these needs?

 

[melloa]

thinking probably USB 3.1 connection would be adequate.

To do exactly what with it? Back-up your data from the NAS to an external USB?

 

[sremick]

Well, lots of open-ended questions here, but for storage I'd strongly suggest building around a minimum of 6 drives and RAIDZ2, using drives at least 4TB/ea. will give you the required storage capacity.

This is 2019. We don't do RAID5 (or RAIDZ1) anymore. For very important reasons, presuming you care about your data. Since you're considering RAID and FreeNAS at all, we will presume you care about your data.

Everything else about the hardware to use depends on information you haven't provided.

 

[consultant]

Well, lots of open-ended questions here, but for storage I'd strongly suggest building around a minimum of 6 drives and RAIDZ2, using drives at least 4TB/ea. will give you the required storage capacity.

This is 2019. We don't do RAID5 (or RAIDZ1) any more. For very important reasons, presuming you care about your data. Since you're considering RAID and FreeNAS at all, we will presume you care about your data.

Everything else about the hardware to use depends on information you haven't provided.

If you need more information, say what you need then. I'm not a mind reader. Well, I'll take a stab at it....

This device is not the only backup device. It's simply to provide user access to historic file versions. If I take a sledge hammer to it, it won't be a big deal, all the data is also stored elsewhere.

There doesn't need to be super fast access to the files as the files are modified why temporarily stored on the local computer. In other words, people are NOT doing something like video editing on a file via a mapped network drive to the NAS. (Disregard my statement about USB. The data transfer will happen over the Gigabit LAN probably upgraded to 10GBe shortly.)


As mentioned, based on our estimates over the lifetime of the device, we'll need 16TB storage. There's about 20GB of data change per day, about half is modification of existing data with little to no filesize change the other 10GB is new data. Those rates will go up but that's hard to predict as it has to do with the growth of the company which involves many unpredictable factors.

Looking for a good bang for the buck that has minimal chance of headaches setting up with FreeNAS.

 

[sremick]

Here's the short version:

RAIDZ1 (sort of like RAID5) only gives you 1 drive's worth of redundancy. This means if a drive goes down, while you're going through the drive replacement process you have zero redundancy. This process involves removing the failed drive (now zero redundancy), placing in the blank replacement drive (you're still at zero redundancy), and then "resilvering" (the rebuild of data onto the blank replacement drive using redundant info from remaining drives). Until the resilvering is complete, you remain at zero redundancy. With modern drive capacities and typical MTBF, since the days of >1TB drives you're almost guaranteed to have a soft read error at some point during this resilvering process. Except now you have zero redundancy. ZFS needs to recover from the read error but now has nothing to fall back on. So what happens? Bye bye data.

This is not hypothetical. I've seen this exact scenario happen multiple times to idiots who bought one of those 3-5 drive cheap consumer NAS appliances, ran RAID5 on them, then lost all their data.

You're going with FreeNAS because you want to protect your data. FreeNAS is all about redundancy. Being in any condition where you have zero redundancy is counter to the whole point. Wasting all the money and time on a solution that won't actually protect you when you need it is like buying an expensive shiny fire extinguisher that when you go to use it, fires for 0.5 seconds. A false sense of security is dangerous and is worse (and more expensive) than knowing you're not safe. Which is why RAID5/RAIDZ1 is not recommended. You might as well have no RAID at all.

(But of course, RAID is not a backup...)

FreeNAS is a powerful tool. It won't prevent you from doing something stupid anymore than a knife will prevent you from turning it on your own eyeball. It's up to you to use it wisely. The folks here on this forum will advise you many times over not to poke your eye out with FreeNAS, but ultimately it's your data and it's on you what you do with the knife. Just know that there won't be much help or sympathy on these forums when you lose your data. I've read some pretty scathing threads.

 

[consultant]

Here's the short version:

RAIDZ1 (sort of like RAID5) only gives you 1 drive's worth of redundancy. This means if a drive goes down, while you're going through the drive replacement process you have zero redundancy. This process involves removing the failed drive (now zero redundancy), placing in the blank replacement drive (you're still at zero redundancy), and then "resilvering" (the rebuild of data onto the blank replacement drive using redundant info from remaining drives). Until the resilvering is complete, you remain at zero redundancy. With modern drive capacities and typical MTBF, since the days of >1TB drives you're almost guaranteed to have a soft read error at some point during this resilvering process. Except now you have zero redundancy. ZFS needs to recover from the read error but now has nothing to fall back on. So what happens? Bye bye data.

This is not hypothetical. I've seen this exact scenario happen multiple times to idiots who bought one of those 3-5 drive cheap consumer NAS appliances, ran RAID5 on them, then lost all their data.

You're going with FreeNAS because you want to protect your data. FreeNAS is all about redundancy. Being in any condition where you have zero redundancy is counter to the whole point. Wasting all the money and time on a solution that won't actually protect you when you need it is like buying an expensive shiny fire extinguisher that when you go to use it, fires for 0.5 seconds. A false sense of security is dangerous and is worse (and more expensive) than knowing you're not safe. Which is why RAID5/RAIDZ1 is not recommended. You might as well have no RAID at all.

(But of course, RAID is not a backup...)

FreeNAS is a powerful tool. It won't prevent you from doing something stupid any more than a knife will prevent you from turning it on your own eyeball. It's up to you to use it wisely. The folks here on this forum will advise you many times over not to poke your eye out with FreeNAS, but ultimately it's your data and it's on you what you do with the knife. Just know that there won't be much help or sympathy on these forums when you lose your data. I've read some pretty scathing threads.

The original post was basically asking for a hardware recommendation. Yes, RAID level could dictate between 3 or 4 drive bays. The thread isn't "Which RAID method should I use?" Let's just say I'm looking for a device with 4 drive bays and leave it at that and get back to the original subject of the thread.