Ideas on a NAS box

[Spawndude]

I have an external hardrive enclosure but it is USB and very slow.

I would like to take the hard drive and put it in a network enclosure instead.

I've been looking at the D-Link MediaLounge Wireless-G Network Storage Enclosure.

Text

Anyone have experience with this

Any ideas on building my own network enclosure like I did with the USB enclosure?

 

[sep]

read some reviews on these devices. Most consumer NAS products will be slow like the usb connections. Also, most NAS require a special format of the drive. So don't plan on swapping these back and forth.

My USB 2.0 drives have been very good to me. I'm getting okay performance from them. I can even burn 8x DVD's from my external.

The best solution would be to build a small computer, add the drives to it and put it on the network. This would be the best performance for the money.

 

[networkman]

What about the Netgear SC101 ? It has an actual 10/100 interface, so no slow USB interface.

Lots of NAS boxes that come with HDs too.

 

[sep]

Originally posted by: networkman
What about the Netgear SC101 ? It has an actual 10/100 interface, so no slow USB interface.

Lots of NAS boxes that come with HDs too.

Read the reviews. Some of these perform the same as an external USB or less. Also you might have to special format the drive. Cost on some of these are too much.

Look in to the Linksys one. I do believe that Tom's Hardware has an article that show how you can hack in to the NOS. Setup FTP Server and other stuff. However newer software allows this native.

Keep looking and post what you find.
-JC

 

[JackMDS]

Wireless is not stable and fast for NAS (USB2 is much faster than Wireless).

The Netgear SC101 might be a choice.

However, all of the entry Level NAS? are currently employing weird compromises.

Some are format in Linux, some are FAT32 only, some can read NTFS, but do not write to it.

You must read all the specification very slow and make sure that it does what you need peed is irrelevant if you can use the NAS correctly.

If it does not indicate the format, do not buy, it might be a propriety format.

:sun:

 

[cmetz]

Linksys NSLU2 with third party firmware (Openslug or Unslung) is pretty much the best out there right now. The field of available choices are all not very good.

 

[Spawndude]

What are the pros and cons of a NAS box vs a computer used solely for file storage?

 

[Nothinman]

What are the pros and cons of a NAS box vs a computer used solely for file storage?

Probably the biggest ones are noise and power consumption. Also with the NAS you'll be stuck with whatever the manufacturer decided to put on the thing, with a small PC you can do whatever you want with it like RAID5, IPv6, WiFi, Samba, Netatalk, seamlessly encrypted files, etc.

 

[abc]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

What are the pros and cons of a NAS box vs a computer used solely for file storage?

Probably the biggest ones are noise and power consumption. Also with the NAS you'll be stuck with whatever the manufacturer decided to put on the thing, with a small PC you can do whatever you want with it like RAID5, IPv6, WiFi, Samba, Netatalk, seamlessly encrypted files, etc.

how about using an old laptop.

 

[abc]

Originally posted by: JackMDS
Wireless is not stable and fast for NAS (USB2 is much faster than Wireless).

The Netgear SC101 might be a choice.

However, all of the entry Level NAS? are currently employing weird compromises.

Some are format in Linux, some are FAT32 only, some can read NTFS, but do not write to it.

You must read all the specification very slow and make sure that it does what you need peed is irrelevant if you can use the NAS correctly.

If it does not indicate the format, do not buy, it might be a propriety format.

:sun:

this month's PCMag has a Linksys ad. Looks like their slug supports NTFS with their firmware upgrade!

 

[networkman]

A little follow-up here on the SC101.. I picked one up today at the local Best Buy before I went to work and was doing some reading on it at lunch time. A couple little known items(to me anyway):

a) It doesn't work with Unix, Macs, or any 64bit OS(according to the manual),

b) The ide drive(no SATA) has to UDMA6 / UDMA133, etc. Older UDMAs aren't supported(according to the manual),

c) For each computer that you want to access the box, you need to load their client software, and

d) The drive(s) are formatted with their own proprietary format, ie. you can't take a drive out of a Windows PC and put in the box and share it, or vice versa.

Needless to say I returned it to Best Buy after work. Blech! :frown:

 

[abc]

yep they could have had a goldmine had they not released something with all these limitations.... i hate particulaly D and C.


also, I've read it runs hot w/ 2 drives.... who's gonna buy it to put only 1?

 

[jwhitt]

i havent read the follow ups just jumped to teh bottom here but my sugestion would be to get youself an older computer nothing great p2 400 or around there, hell a 233 would work, something with a nic, and is stable then search freshmeat for "free nas" or other out of the package nas products they usually work well

 

[mikeford]

One thing is almost absolutely certain, whatever you do now will suck within 6 to 12 months.

All the linksys/netgear type boxes have flakey first generation limitations.

All the PC solutions are big, noisey, power hogs, vs expensive. (more expensive gives you less of the first stuff).

I want something now, and my guess is that an old "client" style small pc is the route I will take.

Anybody around computers should be able to turn up a old but legal copy of NT server, maybe that might actually be a better option than some linux thing?

 

[mjia]

If you run it off an older CPU like a P2, or a mobile processor (like a pentium M), cooling it will be quite easy. In other words, will be very quiet. The difference in noise over a NAS will be negligible if you choose your components carefully. In the extreme, you can even building a completely fanless PC by running a fanless PSU and a low powered CPU cooled passively, but I doubt you can hear a couple quiet fans over a noisy high performance HD.

You can find more infomation on building a quiet PC here: http://silentpcreview.com
You'll find a lot of information on the forum there and get pointers.

In terms of price, it will probably depend on your required capacity. With a PC based solution, you have to make an initial investment on a machine (maybe $150-300), but the marginal cost per MB of storage is lower. A cheaper consumer grade NAS solution will likely not perform as well, so that is also something to factor in.

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: mikeford
Anybody around computers should be able to turn up a old but legal copy of NT server, maybe that might actually be a better option than some linux thing?

Why would that be better? Especially on older hardware. Linux can run in CLI mode only, which saves TONS of resources. Linux manages memory MUCH better. Linux can be run on that older hardware with all the advantages of updated/secure kernal and drivers. If you want to throw an ATA raid card in there, will it work with NT (many dont' come with NT drivers now days)?

 

[mikeford]

Originally posted by: nweaver

Originally posted by: mikeford
Anybody around computers should be able to turn up a old but legal copy of NT server, maybe that might actually be a better option than some linux thing?

Why would that be better? Especially on older hardware. Linux can run in CLI mode only, which saves TONS of resources. Linux manages memory MUCH better. Linux can be run on that older hardware with all the advantages of updated/secure kernal and drivers. If you want to throw an ATA raid card in there, will it work with NT (many dont' come with NT drivers now days)?

NT is going to support NTFS, and linux really doesn't. I don't know much about NT, just tossing it out as another option that might work for some.

24x365 is about 8500 hrs a year, so power costs can really add up, and NAS boxes use a LOT less power than most PC solutions.

 

[djdrastic]

This might just be me , but why are all these boxes so cr**

I mean , all they have to do is build some custom linux distro , that uses internal flash drive that boots the os , has ext3+raid support for the SATA hdd you have to put in for storage , and have a httpd server that allows you to remotely manage it .

I can understand if they have problems , fitting all the hardware in a small box , but ATM the software on these machines are feckin terrible

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: mikeford

Originally posted by: nweaver

Originally posted by: mikeford
Anybody around computers should be able to turn up a old but legal copy of NT server, maybe that might actually be a better option than some linux thing?

Why would that be better? Especially on older hardware. Linux can run in CLI mode only, which saves TONS of resources. Linux manages memory MUCH better. Linux can be run on that older hardware with all the advantages of updated/secure kernal and drivers. If you want to throw an ATA raid card in there, will it work with NT (many dont' come with NT drivers now days)?

NT is going to support NTFS, and linux really doesn't. I don't know much about NT, just tossing it out as another option that might work for some.

24x365 is about 8500 hrs a year, so power costs can really add up, and NAS boxes use a LOT less power than most PC solutions.

why would I want NTFS support on my NAS? It does not provide any benefit over using ext3 or another natively supported linux FS (and if you pull the "can't put it in your computer" line, I'll remind you that my primary box is linux, and my secondary box is windows)

 

[mjia]

There is no definite advantage to either Linux or NT. You'd probably get better raw performance with linux, but NT is generally easier to setup (for someone who does not have experience with either OS).

Existing network structure is probably the most important factor. I run a windows domain, so setting up permissions would be much easier with NTFS.

 

[jwhitt]

hey seriously check this out freenas.org... i use it its great... it isnt fully 100 percent yet there sno radius or user auth yet other than local users added via a shell but thats not an hard task... its a small ass freebsd distro that is entirely configurable via a web interface supports hard and soft raid and other filesystems for a nas solution i dont see why using a ufs filesystem would be bad.... and itll run on pretty much anything i eman ive setup boxes that are simple p2 passivly cooled in a small case 128 ram and a few hard drives software raided together etc sata drive hell usb dirves this thing will work with pretty much anything you throw at it and it can fit on a 16 meg cf card

 

[Blades]

Does FreeNAS support Jumbo frames and Link-AG?

To answer my own question... Heres a reply from the creator.

The GUI of FreeNAS don't actually permit to modify the MTU of an interface, then it don't support Jumbo frame. Link aggregation: no FreeNAS don't support it.

Regards,

Olivier

 

[JackMDS]

I gave up at the moment trying to use interactive Entry Level NAS.

They all ?St***?.

I ended up with the D-Link unit; it takes two normal FAT32 USB Drives and work normally through the Network with No additional software and or other gimmicks.

However it is Slowwww, but I mean really Slowwwwwwwwww.

So, I use it as a Deep Freeze unit. I.e. for Storage of files that are not often needed.

In addition, the ftp server through the Internet is a comfortable way to leave files available without leaving a computer running (Electricity in NYC is a real killer).

:sun:

:sun: