Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
Good or bad idea?
Current got a Buffalo LinkStation with a 500GB HDD in it (of which I've only used about 60GB).
Thinking of swapping it for either a 128GB or 256GB SSD...
Aside from the obvious lifespan of read/writes that people always harp on about, the other things I'm not sure of are the OS that the NAS runs and how that would work with the SSD, and also whether it would support TRIM or not.
|
willay
Moderator
Organiser: South East, National Events
Premium Member
Registered: 10th Nov 02
Location: Roydon, Essex
User status: Offline
|
sorry can you clarify wtf is going on here, are you proposing to replace the traditiona spindal hdd in your NAS device with a SSD hdd?
|
Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
Yes captain
|
Dom
Member
Registered: 13th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
The CPU, NIC and storage controller (unlikely to support TRIM) would be serious bottlenecks on the Buffalo and i can see any improvements would be minimal.
If you have the cash burning a hole though, then try it and see what happens.
But personally i wouldn't bother.
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
Why would you even consider doing that when an old fashioned hard drive costs pennies?
|
Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
Speed 
|
ed
Member
Registered: 10th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
Would you see any benefits though? Surely there are other bottlenecks before you get to the HDD?
|
Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
My current NAS set up is OK but not super quick TBH hence my idea of replacing the drive with an SSD.
I suppose the other obvious bottleneck is LAN speed - only 10/100 ethernet here, no gigabit.
|
Dom
Member
Registered: 13th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sam
I suppose the other obvious bottleneck is LAN speed - only 10/100 ethernet here, no gigabit.
You're probably already hitting that limit with your current mechanical drives then, so using SSDs would do little to improve that.
If you really want to pee around with SSDs and NAS boxes then either roll your own or if you have the cash grap something a TS-879 that'll make use of a load of SSDs.
|
Bart
Member
Registered: 19th Aug 02
Location: Midsomer Norton, Bristol Avon
User status: Offline
|
which buffalo link station?
Lan and CPU will be the biggest bottlekneck. CPU makes a huge difference.
Ive just had a quick look on the net and they dont even advertise which CPUs are installed which makes me think they're a bit mickey mouse.
I would personally consider Synology or Qnap, with Synology being my fav.
|
Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
It's only a little LinkStation Live 500GB, it's just over a year old.
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
If it has to be so fast why not get a USB 3 or thunderbolt external drive instead?
|
Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
Needs to be permanently attached to the network (and not my computer).
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
The only time I ever wish I had faster than a NAS on a gigabit network is when I need to get a few hundred gig server restored within a couple of hours, which isn't very often.
Get something on gigabit and I can't see how you'd need anything faster in the house. (I know we'll need quicker that in the future)
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
That's if your cabled, that'll be useless if you're on wifi.
|
ed
Member
Registered: 10th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
Remember what the I in RAID means too 
|
Dom
Member
Registered: 13th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by ed
Remember what the I in RAID means too
Won't be long before SSDs will be repetitively inexpensive though....
John - Depends what your doing but in a media/internet-rich household it wouldn't be too hard to saturate a 1Gb network.
Slightly off topic but if Infiniband switches were cheaper then you could easily deploy a 10Gbit system for not a huge amount of cash. Already you can do a adhoc Infiniband setup for less than a hundred quid.
[Edited on 30-08-2012 by Dom]
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
I know you could saturate it but from my assumption of sams usage from reading on here I doubt he will be.
The I was originally independent. RAID using good disks is also still very expensive.
|
Chris
Premium Member
Registered: 21st Sep 99
User status: Offline
|
And how is you nas connected again? 12.5 MB/s over 100Mb ethernet.
Is SATA in raid 1 quicker than this
|
Bart
Member
Registered: 19th Aug 02
Location: Midsomer Norton, Bristol Avon
User status: Offline
|
raid 1 will be slightly slower, but wouldnt be enough to worry about it bottleknecking.
Everything would be SATA
[Edited on 31-08-2012 by Bart]
|
