DS1821+ NAS announced - probably THE most important storage news in a while

[joger]

I've ben using my DS1817+ now for almost three years without any flaws - in fact it changed the way i handle data and it made my life so much easier.

Especially the 10 GbE connection allows for ultra fast project transfers and it hosts my LightRoom collection of images. Combined with the Smart-Preview function within LR it feels like the images are locally on the ultra fast built in SSD.

Scrolling thought the library is blistering fast and working on the images feels like they are local.

Here is a first preview of the news.

So what are the things that make meekest so excited - to should I say relaxed - well you can have built in data healing and redundancy of data which brings in a daramatic safety new when handling important ( client ) data.

The new NAS from Synology has some nice enhancements that enable an even better usability.

Compared to my existing NAS from 2017 it offers blistering fast transfers rates with up to 2300 MB/s compare to the 880 MB/s peak performance in port truncating and thus for more than one user in the same network.Additionally:

• BTRFS file structure
• Possibility to use Raid 6 with 2 discs to fail before any kind of data loss could happen
• Possibility of Docker and virtual machines
• Global accessibility of data 24/7
• No need for an inherently insecure cloud solution
• ( Extremely ) low operational cost
• Low energy consumption and thus heat creation
• Built in dual M.2 slot for up to 8 TB Raid 1 cache for ever faster data access
• Optional Dual 10 GbE connectivity with port trunking ( doubling the data rate for more than one user )
• Vast APP store with free APPs that can handle office, multimedia and business purposes
• Up to 32 GB RAM for handling tons of VMs in parallel
• Up to 160 TB RAW capacity
• All files on one centralized place rather than a distributed collection of external drives without any data integrity safety net being single drives

Shortly we will have 20 TB drives in online supply at the usual suspect stores at reasonable price levels. I am currently using 8x 10 TB drives in Raid 6 resulting in some 55 TB real space ( MAC counting metric ) - I intend to use in the new casing 6x 20 TB in Raid 6 to begin with resulting in 75 TB usable space and I can add a 20 TB drive every year to grow further in space and I can migrate the RAID 6 to the larger space on the fly. Capacity will be some 115 TB totally filled with 20 TB drives in Raid 6.

My current NAS will server as the backup at a place away from my house - currently I am doing backups on single HDDs - which is cumbersome and not very clever.

Remember - there is only one way to secure your data: backup - backup - backup !!

Any kind of Raid solution will only make your life more convenient in case a drive or two will fail - but there is a lot more to cope with to bring securely your data to the future. A collection of external drives is like working in the stone age.

Compare to a local DAS the NAS can do so much more and it eliminates the noise floor in your working space.

Be sure to have a UPS also attached to your precious data and be sure to have at least one backup outside of your house.

I wonder how many of those dual slot for safety reason fans have a dual or triple backup concept - mine is as follows:

1. Data on an inherently secure storage place in Raid 6 with 2 disc fault tolerance
2. 1st level backup to a mirror NAS outside of my house once every night
3. HDDs with important snapshots of the work art a different place
4. Local files on the individual machines as backup of the current projects

Even in case you're a fan of SSDs be sure you have the data always on two fo them in parallel - SSDs are inherently less secure than HDDs and they are impossible to be repaired. HDDs ar the perfect space format even in the 21st century and with 2300 MB/s read ans 1150 MB/s read.

I will buy mine once available - probably January 2021 and the initial 6x 20 TB drives shortly after.

Hope this helps some of you to sort out the data storage probelms.

A last word about the network itself - there is a really nicht managed switch from QNAP on the market for some 300 bucks including 4x 10 GbE connections allowing for Dual port trunking of 10 GbE - I will replace my Asus dual 10 GbE Switch with the QNAP QSW-M408-4C

 

[joger]

NAScompares

Unsurprisingly, the Synology DS1821+ NAS is the better overall choice. It just brings more of everything to the table and either matches or improves upon every feature of the DS1819+ NAS from 2018/19, Thereby making any kind of choosing between them largely irrelevant. Of course, the DS1819+ NAS does have a few good points. For a start, it might be at a good price in the sales soon, as well as featuring a much more Synology researched CPU in the C3538 (currently available on around 12-15 different NAS systems). But when push comes to shove, the Synology DS1821+ NAS is just better in 95% of the ways that matter most.

 

[david smith]

I am very excited about this, my DS1813+ & expansion unit are still both going strong, but a combination of the DS1821+ & DSM7 will certainly make my data feel even more secure.I shall use the DS1813 for backing up the new unit too.

God knows when it's actually going to become available though.

 

[joger]

I am very excited about this, my DS1813+ & expansion unit are still both going strong, but a combination of the DS1821+ & DSM7 will certainly make my data feel even more secure.I shall use the DS1813 for backing up the new unit too.

God knows when it's actually going to become available though.

Looks like the supply is filling with units across Europe. Will get mine in January and the network around needs some overhauling too.

I own the DS817+ and like you I am going to use the old unit for backup purposes away from my premises to cope with disaster recover in case the house burns down or I get robbed or lightning hits the house ( happened some two years ago with a total loss of electronics and consequent recovery process from backups outside the house )

The DS1821+ has basically double the data throughput than my DS1817+ thus I will use port trunking for double the speed to the switch - this will allow for fast data transfers to two MACs with 10 GbE at the same time.

I'll upgrade to following components in the coming 2 months:

1. DS1821+ in Januar 2021 once available in my area
2. E10G18-T2 dual 10 GbE PCIe gen 3 Ethernet card ( in transit )
3. QSW-M408-4C quad 10 GbE managed switch for port trunking ( in transit )
4. 8x 18 TB Ironwolf PRO drives for 108 TB storage capacity in Raid 6 (once around 500 EUR )
5. 2x 2 TB 970 EVO PRO for Raid 1 read / write cache ( once DS1821+ arrived )
6. 2x 16 GB SO-DIMM ECC RAM ( once DS1821+ arrived )

Initial tests proof up to 1200 MB read/write speed over single 10 GbE connection - fast enough for my 10 GbE equipped iMP.

Will post results once the setup is done and everything runs smoothly. DSM 7.0 is also a very attractive move from Synology and will bring further speed improvements. I might wait to transfer my precious data until DSM 7 runs stable.

I am already today using my NAS for external access and data transfer while I am traveling. No need to carry dozens of unsecured media. Just go back to the hotel and start to transfer the results of the day home to the base camp NAS and you're done ( provided the hotel has an acceptable data connection and subscription plan )

Total cost of the current plan in execution some 6.3 k EUR

The current DS1817+ costed something similar some three years ago and will serve for further 5++ years as the backup for the main unit.

 

[david smith]

I am very excited about this, my DS1813+ & expansion unit are still both going strong, but a combination of the DS1821+ & DSM7 will certainly make my data feel even more secure.I shall use the DS1813 for backing up the new unit too.

God knows when it's actually going to become available though.

Looks like the supply is filling with units across Europe. Will get mine in January and the network around needs some overhauling too.

I own the DS817+ and like you I am going to use the old unit for backup purposes away from my premises to cope with disaster recover in case the house burns down or I get robbed or lightning hits the house ( happened some two years ago with a total loss of electronics and consequent recovery process from backups outside the house )

The DS1821+ has basically double the data throughput than my DS1817+ thus I will use port trunking for double the speed to the switch - this will allow for fast data transfers to two MACs with 10 GbE at the same time.

I'll upgrade to following components in the coming 2 months:

1. DS1821+ in Januar 2021 once available in my area
2. E10G18-T2 dual 10 GbE PCIe gen 3 Ethernet card ( in transit )
3. QSW-M408-4C quad 10 GbE managed switch for port trunking ( in transit )
4. 8x 18 TB Ironwolf PRO drives for 108 TB storage capacity in Raid 6 (once around 500 EUR )
5. 2x 2 TB 970 EVO PRO for Raid 1 read / write cache ( once DS1821+ arrived )
6. 2x 16 GB SO-DIMM ECC RAM ( once DS1821+ arrived )

Initial tests proof up to 1200 MB read/write speed over single 10 GbE connection - fast enough for my 10 GbE equipped iMP.

Will post results once the setup is done and everything runs smoothly. DSM 7.0 is also a very attractive move from Synology and will bring further speed improvements. I might wait to transfer my precious data until DSM 7 runs stable.

I am already today using my NAS for external access and data transfer while I am traveling. No need to carry dozens of unsecured media. Just go back to the hotel and start to transfer the results of the day home to the base camp NAS and you're done ( provided the hotel has an acceptable data connection and subscription plan )

Total cost of the current plan in execution some 6.3 k EUR

The current DS1817+ costed something similar some three years ago and will serve for further 5++ years as the backup for the main unit.

Well mine has arrived, just waiting for the 16gb ram module

 

[joger]

I am very excited about this, my DS1813+ & expansion unit are still both going strong, but a combination of the DS1821+ & DSM7 will certainly make my data feel even more secure.I shall use the DS1813 for backing up the new unit too.

God knows when it's actually going to become available though.

Looks like the supply is filling with units across Europe. Will get mine in January and the network around needs some overhauling too.

I own the DS817+ and like you I am going to use the old unit for backup purposes away from my premises to cope with disaster recover in case the house burns down or I get robbed or lightning hits the house ( happened some two years ago with a total loss of electronics and consequent recovery process from backups outside the house )

The DS1821+ has basically double the data throughput than my DS1817+ thus I will use port trunking for double the speed to the switch - this will allow for fast data transfers to two MACs with 10 GbE at the same time.

I'll upgrade to following components in the coming 2 months:

1. DS1821+ in Januar 2021 once available in my area
2. E10G18-T2 dual 10 GbE PCIe gen 3 Ethernet card ( in transit )
3. QSW-M408-4C quad 10 GbE managed switch for port trunking ( in transit )
4. 8x 18 TB Ironwolf PRO drives for 108 TB storage capacity in Raid 6 (once around 500 EUR )
5. 2x 2 TB 970 EVO PRO for Raid 1 read / write cache ( once DS1821+ arrived )
6. 2x 16 GB SO-DIMM ECC RAM ( once DS1821+ arrived )

Initial tests proof up to 1200 MB read/write speed over single 10 GbE connection - fast enough for my 10 GbE equipped iMP.

Will post results once the setup is done and everything runs smoothly. DSM 7.0 is also a very attractive move from Synology and will bring further speed improvements. I might wait to transfer my precious data until DSM 7 runs stable.

I am already today using my NAS for external access and data transfer while I am traveling. No need to carry dozens of unsecured media. Just go back to the hotel and start to transfer the results of the day home to the base camp NAS and you're done ( provided the hotel has an acceptable data connection and subscription plan )

Total cost of the current plan in execution some 6.3 k EUR

The current DS1817+ costed something similar some three years ago and will serve for further 5++ years as the backup for the main unit.

Well mine has arrived, just waiting for the 16gb ram module

Which one did you order and could you report whether you get a system messages in case it is not the Synology module you've ordered?

There are discussions about the non Synology branded modules being recognized by the system.

 

[casperghst42]

Got the 1621+ which is the exact same model - just with 6 bays instead of 8.

You might be able to add 32gb memory, but the CPU is the major limitation, yes it’s faster than the previous models, but it’s not a xeon / ryzen 7.

I’m running ~15 docker containers without too much impact, but VMs (kvm) has a fully different impact.

And as I and a few other people have discovered, the NMvE cache is counter productive; it works for small files, but if you try to copy a +10 gigabyte file, then performance drops through the floor - removing the NMvE cache gives me ~90-110mb/s on a 1GB network.

Yes the xx21+ models are worthy upgrade, but as I discovered they have some interesting limitations.

--
www.exilepixel.com

 

[joger]

Got the 1621+ which is the exact same model - just with 6 bays instead of 8.

You might be able to add 32gb memory, but the CPU is the major limitation, yes it’s faster than the previous models, but it’s not a xeon / ryzen 7.

I’m running ~15 docker containers without too much impact, but VMs (kvm) has a fully different impact.

And as I and a few other people have discovered, the NMvE cache is counter productive; it works for small files, but if you try to copy a +10 gigabyte file, then performance drops through the floor - removing the NMvE cache gives me ~90-110mb/s on a 1GB network.

Yes the xx21+ models are worthy upgrade, but as I discovered they have some interesting limitations.

Which RAM and which M.2 modules are you using?

Did you try DSM 7.0 Beta?

 

[david smith]

Will do, it’s all up and running with the ram installed, I must admit I completely forget to check for the “incorrect ram” message. I too read numerous reports on Reddit before purchasing. I will check tomorrow but there’s been nothing obvious.

KSM26SED8/16HD

Kingston KSM26SED8/16HD 16GB DDR4 2666Mhz ECC Unbuffered Memory RAM SODIMM


--
David

 

[david smith]

Actually, I’ve just checked, no error message, and nothing in the log. I’ve got the 16gb in slot 1, and the Synology 4gb in slot 2, both the same spec and working fine together.



On Reddit, there were a couple of people who had no error message at first, but then suddenly started to get them, but I’m keeping my fingers crossed.

 

[casperghst42]

Got the 1621+ which is the exact same model - just with 6 bays instead of 8.

You might be able to add 32gb memory, but the CPU is the major limitation, yes it’s faster than the previous models, but it’s not a xeon / ryzen 7.

I’m running ~15 docker containers without too much impact, but VMs (kvm) has a fully different impact.

And as I and a few other people have discovered, the NMvE cache is counter productive; it works for small files, but if you try to copy a +10 gigabyte file, then performance drops through the floor - removing the NMvE cache gives me ~90-110mb/s on a 1GB network.

Yes the xx21+ models are worthy upgrade, but as I discovered they have some interesting limitations.

Which RAM and which M.2 modules are you using?

Did you try DSM 7.0 Beta?

Memory is Transcend SO-DIMM 16GB DDR4-2133, no problem with that (and for ECC it was cheap) - the box does tell me that it’s not original Synology Memory when I reboot it, but that is all.

The NvME is an Transcend 128GB - it does help for general file access to have the NMvE cache, but as I discovered it has a negative impact when copying large files (+3-5 GB size). I see it as a bug, but as I only tried it for fun, I’m not really trying to figure out why it happens.

No, no DSM 7.0 Beta - I do not do beta stuff on anything which has a copy of files which I would like to have for a long time (my photos and music). I’ll probably wait for 7.1 before I upgrade.

I’ve now moved my VM (KVM) to an Intel NUC as they mostly are for lab stuff anyway - runs much better there.

Oh, and just to throw a bone to the people who want a discussion; I’m using EXT4 - haven’t had a problem with it since around 2003 - 2005 (kernel bug), which makes it difficult for me to find a reason to moved to btrfs (which I do not consider mature).

--
www.exilepixel.com

 

[joger]

Got the 1621+ which is the exact same model - just with 6 bays instead of 8.

You might be able to add 32gb memory, but the CPU is the major limitation, yes it’s faster than the previous models, but it’s not a xeon / ryzen 7.

I’m running ~15 docker containers without too much impact, but VMs (kvm) has a fully different impact.

And as I and a few other people have discovered, the NMvE cache is counter productive; it works for small files, but if you try to copy a +10 gigabyte file, then performance drops through the floor - removing the NMvE cache gives me ~90-110mb/s on a 1GB network.

Yes the xx21+ models are worthy upgrade, but as I discovered they have some interesting limitations.

Which RAM and which M.2 modules are you using?

Did you try DSM 7.0 Beta?

Memory is Transcend SO-DIMM 16GB DDR4-2133, no problem with that (and for ECC it was cheap) - the box does tell me that it’s not original Synology Memory when I reboot it, but that is all.

Thx - good to know - no memory for me then ;-)

The NvME is an Transcend 128GB - it does help for general file access to have the NMvE cache, but as I discovered it has a negative impact when copying large files (+3-5 GB size). I see it as a bug, but as I only tried it for fun, I’m not really trying to figure out why it happens.

Interesting - I've had 3x 256 GB Samsung PRO SSDs in my DS1817+ as Raid 5 for read/write caching on DSM 6.X and it enabled sustained read and write speeds of 500 .. 880 MB/s over the 10 GbE connection in excess of 100 GB data transfers - my experience was the bigger the better - roughly ⅔ of the SSD cache is permanently full with cached files - in case you only invest 128 GB the free space is probably less then 30 GB after using it for several weeks - thus the cache will not help that much - as you described.

I intend to install 2x 2 TB since the 4 TB modules are still not adequately priced - there is still a premium charge per GB for the larger M.2 PCBs.

Unfortuantely the cache took away three HDD bays in my DS1817+ so I replaced them with HDDs finally.

Maybe your problems are related to your file system? The software worked on my DS1817+ seamlessly and reliably - I can see no reason why it should be faulty on one of their new devices given the fact that the M.2 modules are accessed much faster.

No, no DSM 7.0 Beta - I do not do beta stuff on anything which has a copy of files which I would like to have for a long time (my photos and music). I’ll probably wait for 7.1 before I upgrade.

Synology claims that the caching algorithm is dramatically enhanced in DSM 7.0 and the over all performance is also dramatically upped - good reasons IMHO for using it in case you have a backup of your data - which you should have anyway ;-)

( my DS1817+ will be a 1:1 backup for my DS1821+ outside my house )

I’ve now moved my VM (KVM) to an Intel NUC as they mostly are for lab stuff anyway - runs much better there.

Sure - I can see that point - for me the NAS is always on and thus one or two VMs don't harm too much in terms of speed. I simply do some company stuff where I unfortunately need a windows installation - otherwise I'd have no use for that at all. For travel expenses and company network access it is more than fast enough

Oh, and just to throw a bone to the people who want a discussion; I’m using EXT4 - haven’t had a problem with it since around 2003 - 2005 (kernel bug), which makes it difficult for me to find a reason to moved to btrfs (which I do not consider mature).

Individual experiences are nice anecdotes and proof almost nothing. I am using BTRFS since day one on my Synology NAS devices and did not have a single problem as well.

Do you have sources that confirm your claim? I did not find anything that speaks against a more advanced file system like BTRFS or ZFS or APFS

--
_____________________________________
A7R IV - one camera to rule them all
ISO 9000 definition of quality: 'Degree to which a set of inherent characteristic fulfills requirements'
I am the classic “Windows by Day, Mac by Night user'
“The horizon of many people is a circle with zero radius which they call their point of view.” Albert Einstein
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." Douglas Adams

 

[david smith]

Actually, I’ve just checked, no error message, and nothing in the log. I’ve got the 16gb in slot 1, and the Synology 4gb in slot 2, both the same spec and working fine together.

On Reddit, there were a couple of people who had no error message at first, but then suddenly started to get them, but I’m keeping my fingers crossed.

Oh well, the warning message has now popped up (non-synology memory), I can't say it's going to bother me though.

 

[casperghst42]

Got the 1621+ which is the exact same model - just with 6 bays instead of 8.

You might be able to add 32gb memory, but the CPU is the major limitation, yes it’s faster than the previous models, but it’s not a xeon / ryzen 7.

I’m running ~15 docker containers without too much impact, but VMs (kvm) has a fully different impact.

And as I and a few other people have discovered, the NMvE cache is counter productive; it works for small files, but if you try to copy a +10 gigabyte file, then performance drops through the floor - removing the NMvE cache gives me ~90-110mb/s on a 1GB network.

Yes the xx21+ models are worthy upgrade, but as I discovered they have some interesting limitations.

Which RAM and which M.2 modules are you using?

Did you try DSM 7.0 Beta?

Memory is Transcend SO-DIMM 16GB DDR4-2133, no problem with that (and for ECC it was cheap) - the box does tell me that it’s not original Synology Memory when I reboot it, but that is all.

Thx - good to know - no memory for me then ;-)

The NvME is an Transcend 128GB - it does help for general file access to have the NMvE cache, but as I discovered it has a negative impact when copying large files (+3-5 GB size). I see it as a bug, but as I only tried it for fun, I’m not really trying to figure out why it happens.

Interesting - I've had 3x 256 GB Samsung PRO SSDs in my DS1817+ as Raid 5 for read/write caching on DSM 6.X and it enabled sustained read and write speeds of 500 .. 880 MB/s over the 10 GbE connection in excess of 100 GB data transfers - my experience was the bigger the better - roughly ⅔ of the SSD cache is permanently full with cached files - in case you only invest 128 GB the free space is probably less then 30 GB after using it for several weeks - thus the cache will not help that much - as you described.

I intend to install 2x 2 TB since the 4 TB modules are still not adequately priced - there is still a premium charge per GB for the larger M.2 PCBs.

Unfortuantely the cache took away three HDD bays in my DS1817+ so I replaced them with HDDs finally.

2TB NvME’s are simply too expensive for me to experiment with them, especially as I only have 1GbE network - if I had 10GbE I’d probably see if I could source one.

And it’s fast enough as it is. I’ll have to see what happens when 10GbE becomes available in the form-factor I want, and with the right functionality (POE).

Maybe your problems are related to your file system? The software worked on my DS1817+ seamlessly and reliably - I can see no reason why it should be faulty on one of their new devices given the fact that the M.2 modules are accessed much faster.

No, no DSM 7.0 Beta - I do not do beta stuff on anything which has a copy of files which I would like to have for a long time (my photos and music). I’ll probably wait for 7.1 before I upgrade.

Synology claims that the caching algorithm is dramatically enhanced in DSM 7.0 and the over all performance is also dramatically upped - good reasons IMHO for using it in case you have a backup of your data - which you should have anyway ;-)

There has been one or two other people who have been writing about the cache problem on the synology forum. It’s actually quite basic how to add a r/w cache, so yes it’s a bit strange that it does behave like that.

( my DS1817+ will be a 1:1 backup for my DS1821+ outside my house )

I’ll have to see what the future brings, but currently I backup to a raid6 which is not in the same box. And then copy my photos to a USB drive (one in a while).

I’ve now moved my VM (KVM) to an Intel NUC as they mostly are for lab stuff anyway - runs much better there.

Sure - I can see that point - for me the NAS is always on and thus one or two VMs don't harm too much in terms of speed. I simply do some company stuff where I unfortunately need a windows installation - otherwise I'd have no use for that at all. For travel expenses and company network access it is more than fast enough

I wanted to get ridge of the open switch (for which they have no settings in the GUI), and also the VMs I run, take up more cpu and ram that I felt was good for the poor nas box. I migrated from a home build box which is running an E3 1245 v5 ... one gets used to having enough power when needed.

Oh, and just to throw a bone to the people who want a discussion; I’m using EXT4 - haven’t had a problem with it since around 2003 - 2005 (kernel bug), which makes it difficult for me to find a reason to moved to btrfs (which I do not consider mature).

Individual experiences are nice anecdotes and proof almost nothing. I am using BTRFS since day one on my Synology NAS devices and did not have a single problem as well.

Do you have sources that confirm your claim? I did not find anything that speaks against a more advanced file system like BTRFS or ZFS or APFS

I am not a fan of APFS (it is still not mature, and Apple still haven’t added all the administration functionality to it), ZFS is actually great, but has one major problem; you can’t expand vpools. If you like me only do in Raid6 (or equivalent), then you need to add minimum 4 drives to expand a volume, which makes it a very expensive experience. Also you need cache drives when you get over a curtain size to make it fly.

BTRFS, has (for me) the same problem as RaiserFS - it uses a Tree, which means that once in a while you have to balance it to keep it balanced. And when you do and at the same time have a system failure (power or just a crash) then there is a chance that your data is gone. They have improved on this over the years, but for me that is not something I want to venture into. There are still people who report file system crashes which are non-recoverable. Sometime in the future it might become stable enough for me to venture into.
Also the other part which makes people look at it is snapshotting, which also can be found in XFS (mature and stable), and then transparent compression.... I used what with Novell Netware more than 20 years ago, and discovered that it might not be the best thing around. I know for some people BTRFS providers functionality they need, but until I need it, I am staying with LVM and Ext4.

And what most people don’t see, Synology is using mdadm to build their raids, and lvm to build the volumes for btrfs - I don’t know how much functionality they actually provide in regards to btrfs - except for snapshotting.

I just don’t like to loose data (for that reason, I should use ZFS).

 

[joger]

... 2TB NvME’s are simply too expensive for me to experiment with them, especially as I only have 1GbE network - if I had 10GbE I’d probably see if I could source one ...

ah - I see - we're not talking about the same topic

My current DS 1817+ runs with HDDs without cache already beyond 350 MB/s in raid 6 over 10 GbE connection.

With cache it ran around 500 .. 880 MB/s - but I replaced the three 256 GB SATA SSDs with three 10 TB HDDs due to storage needs. Luckily 18 TB drives are now available at an affordable level.

Just received my new QNAP QSW-M408-4C last week with four 10 GbE ports to replace my Asus XG-U2008 with only 2 ports to allow for port trunking of two lanes to have more throughput to the network.

These things are damn cheap now - my main concern however is the electrical power consumption. The QNAP QSW-M408-4C has only 12 W in idle mode - which is very acceptable - the Asus has 13 W in idle mode. So basically a bit more efficient.

I hate it in the summer when the network unnecessarily heats up the room and causes a large electrical bill let alone the environmental impact which should be avoided by all means.

I was a bit worried about the QNAP QSW-M408-4C - but it looks like a very affordable and good solution. I hope to see Internet raising above 1 Gbit in my area next year.

Data integrity is no concern to me due to backups on different file systems and media.

All important data should always be on several backups outside of one's house.

--
_____________________________________
A7R IV - one camera to rule them all
ISO 9000 definition of quality: 'Degree to which a set of inherent characteristic fulfills requirements'
I am the classic “Windows by Day, Mac by Night user'
“The horizon of many people is a circle with zero radius which they call their point of view.” Albert Einstein
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." Douglas Adams

 

[joger]

Actually, I’ve just checked, no error message, and nothing in the log. I’ve got the 16gb in slot 1, and the Synology 4gb in slot 2, both the same spec and working fine together.

On Reddit, there were a couple of people who had no error message at first, but then suddenly started to get them, but I’m keeping my fingers crossed.

Oh well, the warning message has now popped up (non-synology memory), I can't say it's going to bother me though.

Thx for posting - will get the original then - voiding the warranty is no option for me at that small uplift in pricing .

Saw a very reasonable priced package including the 32 GB „original“ RAM - nevertheless this is annoying to say the least.

Will buy the rest end of January probably. Prices will further drop until then.

 

[repairmant]

I see one MAJOR flaw with your choice not synology cause they rock I use them at work and home but using SMR drives they are "known" well for issues in NAS units NEVER ever use them unless you dont value your data. Also SMR drives has way longer repair and rebuild times.

Google SMR bad in NAS and the internet has tons of sites going over the bad stuff with it. 18TB non-SMR (CMR) would be the better pick.

 

[joger]

I see one MAJOR flaw with your choice not synology cause they rock I use them at work and home but using SMR drives they are "known" well for issues in NAS units NEVER ever use them unless you dont value your data. Also SMR drives has way longer repair and rebuild times.

Google SMR bad in NAS and the internet has tons of sites going over the bad stuff with it. 18TB non-SMR (CMR) would be the better pick.

IronWolf 18 TB drives are CMR

I am running the configuration outlined since 4 weeks. Will compile a detailed report in a couple of days. So far flawless and veeeeery fast