I have a long-term dream to build a fanless SSD-powered NAS
Self-hosted, silent, fast - what’s not to love, aside from steep price tag?
Comment on Beelink ME mini is a NAS with an Intel N200 processor and support for up to 6 SSDs
adoxographer@feddit.dk 1 month ago
Are people really doing NAS with SSD? Not just for cache?
Allero@lemmy.today 1 month ago
sj_zero 1 month ago
SSDs dominant failure modes of catastrophic failure?
HiTekRedNek@lemm.ee 1 month ago
The dominant failure mode of an SSD is to become read-only. There’s no data loss there…
sj_zero 1 month ago
Depends on the SSD. I've only ever had one SSD become read only, and I've seen a lot of failed SSDs.
IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 1 month ago
More reliable, less power draw than HDDs, faster and far more space efficient.
Unless you are data hoarding random torrents, 6 to 12 TB is plenty.
Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de 1 month ago
More reliable
Heavily depends. If you want to use it as long-term cold storage you absolutely should not use SSDs, they’re losing data when left unpowered for too long. While HDDs are also not perfect in retaining data forever, they won’t fail as quickly when left on a shelf.
stetech@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Good and true point, but arguably most NASs are built to be used, not to be not-used…
Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de 1 month ago
Well, they arguably can also be used as one big long-term storage. Not sure who’d need to save so much data for a long time, but there surely will be at least some people who do and buy the “modern solution” over old HDDs thinking they’re better in general. As the “family backup” for example, or as cold storage solution in faculties that can be quickly accessed if needed.
Read somewhere about a professor who used SSDs to “permanently” store important data on SSDs (perhaps in the comments of the article above) for a few years. Well, wasn’t that permanent…
geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
HDDs die faster when running because they have to spin though.
Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de 1 month ago
To my knowledge it isn’t them constantly running that wears them out most, but spinning up and down very often. Weren’t NAS drives designed to never spin down for that very reason?
adoxographer@feddit.dk 1 month ago
Are they really more reliable than NAS “grade” HDD - and a ssd cache? I always saw SSD with a max write on them, and a NAS does plenty of I/O.
Admittedly I’ve never had an SSD go bad in my computers, but for some reason I never considered them as a good enough alternative for a NAS.
Are there any data you know of the top of your head before I go searching?
IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 1 month ago
If you use a NAS for file storage it really does not do extreme amounts of IO. Similar to a desktop SSD.
There are torrent freaks out there who really need that price performance fix for everyone else SSDs are fine. Always run them in RAID anyway for redundancy and get TLC storage not QLC.
adoxographer@feddit.dk 1 month ago
TIL about TLC vs QLC, thanks
I guess my next Nas will be SSD then
possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
If you don’t cheap out you are fine
Ulrich@feddit.org 1 month ago
Yes, for purposes of noise, size, speed and power efficiency
aspoleczny@lemmy.world 1 month ago
I did, because of energy efficiency and quietness. But also I heavily compromised on the amount of space.
Pyotr@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Yep. Smaller, more energy efficient (extremes expensive electricity here, over 1€/kW at peak time summers), and more temperature resiliant (had to shut the rust based nas down in peak summer months as it could not keep drives cool enough with 3k rpm ippc fans)
11x 4tb drives in mine. Raidz3. Paired with a Xeon and 64gb of ram. All in a 5L case.
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
I’m considering it. Our storage needs are modest (8TB capacity, 2-3TB stored), our HDDs are getting long in the tooth, and I want to downsize so it can fit under my bed and plug directly into the router (it’s currently connecting over wifi). So something relatively inexpensive could convince me to switch.
alehel@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
If you live in a small place and dont have massive storage needs, it can make sense for the sake of the quietness.
gaael@lemm.ee 1 month ago
This. I can’t afford reliable always-on storage now, but I plan to build for SSDs rather than HDDs because I don’t have a separate room to put it into.
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
I’ve been on the lookout for a quiet, inexpensive NAS that I can put under my bed and forget about. I currently have 2x8TB in a mirror, and I’m only using 2-3TB.
In fact, I might even feel comfortable eliminating the RAID w/ SSDs once I clean up our backup strategy (yes, RAID isn’t a backup, I know and I feel bad).