A Guide to NAS - Things People STILL Get Wrong

[@joaomiguelxs]

As someone whos just beginning to build a diy box for my small business, dispelling some of those NAS myths is incredibly educational / economical. Thanks!

[@nascompares]

Thanks for the kind words bud; have a bloody great Friday and a solid 10/10 weekend!!!

[@brianfritz575]

Regarding the "Synology doesn't allow non approved drives", I think you miss the big point of people's rant at Synology regarding this issue. I had a Synology NAS. I used it with drives not on the compatibility list. I was fine with the warnings that popped up. I needed help with an issue totally unrelated to the drives. Tech support wanted system logs, which as soon as they saw the drives were not on the compatibility list, would no longer provide me support on the issue! So, yeah, you can use drives not on their list, but they then hang you out to dry and you get zero support on anything! This is why I and others have abandoned Synology and refuse to bend to their... must use compatibility list drives... Yes, I'm gonna call it Synology Corporate BS! By the way, Love the Hoodie!

[@Mr76Pontiac]

But it's not BS. They have a stack of drives sitting ready to be tested. They didn't cherry pick a set of drives and say "Thou shall use these few drives" and then called it a day. They put all those drives on the boards and tested to find out whether they worked CORRECTLY or not. These are the drives that they've tested, passed their internal quality of service checks and had acceptable results. The other drives that have been on their compatibility list may have not passed with the hardware being used now because of low level communication problems, or found bugs with firmware on either end of the cable, or some kind of incompatibility. JUST because the hardware is out there to be used, can fit in the slot that will accept the device (And I'm not just talking drives here) doesn't mean that it's going to work flawlessly. Companies aren't going to spend their support time trying to figure out what the problem is with their unit if the hardware hasn't been tested, documented and validated. They're not going to spend the time trying to figure out what the problem is if all variables are accounted for. The fact that you had an unknown variable invalidates any attempt to diagnose the problem whether you understand it or not that it relates to the hardware they specifically know. A lot of time goes into ensuring the quality of their machines do what they're supposed to do, within the specifications that they define. They're not blocking you from using whatever drives you have laying around, they're saying they're not going to help you if you don't follow their list of known good and working and compatible hardware.

[@Nasguy-b7q]

@@Mr76PontiacBig fan of Pontiac btw. i think they use this tactics to sell their stuff. All other manufacturers can use drives without issues. You can't even get a pool (but yet you can use it as a cache) unless you use their m2, that is a load of nonsense. One of the many reasons I dumped synology.

[@brianfritz575]

@@Mr76Pontiac The issue is that per Synology's own website, you are incorrect. "While it is recommended by Synology that you use the products in this list, you are not required to do so. Not being listed on the compatibility list does not imply incompatibly. It only means that Synology has not tested that particular equipment with a specific segment of their product line." So, they denied me support, not because my drive was incompatible, they denied me support because they were not on the compatibility list. The drives I used were not on their incompatibility list. Further Synology has a disclaimer that they may change the list at any moment, without notice. This means you may buy based on the list, only to find out they've removed support for that drive. My issue was with Container Manager, getting something to work correctly. I had other things running fine on that disk. Even other containers. Yet they denied support. This had nothing to do with the disk. No Thanks... I have options of companies that will support me without charging me a Synology Tax!

[@alch3mi5t.]

Consumer Synology Nas' are for the same people who buy pre-built gaming PC's for £2500 then need an RTB because a ddr stick moved in transit. You pay for ignorance, most often the ignorance of other buyers.

[@blathum9]

Interesting I call Synology about 2 to 3 times a year with issues and they have never asked me that question. Maybe you were just unlucky. I still agree that they should not limit the drives you use in their NAS units this is a terrible idea. I don't blame you for leaving and going to another vendor.

[@davelamont]

I watch EVERY video you put out. I laughed at your sweatshirt.

[@TheShortStory]

About the hard drives: in many markets, such as East Asia, data center drives (especially in my experience Toshiba) are cheaper than NAS drives and offer outstanding durability. The downside with enterprise drives is that they’re often quite a bit louder.

[@DavidM2002]

I would add "I don't need anything bigger than a 2 bay." That's what I first thought but bought a 4 bay anyways and am eternally grateful that I did. Next time I thought "I'm going to buy a 6 bay just in case." I bought an 8 bay and have never fully populated it but am very glad that I did. The incremental cost per bay gets cheaper and is far cheaper than starting from the beginning all over again with a larger NAS. And Synology's SHR is a game changer when it comes to keeping a bay or 3 empty until you need more space because now you can use larger drives than you initially installed.

[@ironfist7789]

Yup, except my parents only need a 2 bay for real :P, but not less than 2. But yeah, other than that I agree because the harddrives seem to be the bulk of the cost of a unit anyway.

[@danielmcgowan9534]

@ironfist7789 @davidm2002 I agree with both points. For my main server and backup I should have gotten more than 4 bays. My parents get a cute little 2 bay server where I push photos of the grandkids. I can also push critical files for yet another off-site backup.

[@denvera1g1]

5:09 I like to populate half the drives on a new system, wait 6 months, and populate the other half and turn it into a mirror of the first pool, this way when a drive fails in the first pool, i can schedule a replacement of all the drives, and i know i have ~6 months before the second pool is likely to have a drive failure, this also helps to ensure any manufacturing defects in a run of drives only affect one pool.

[@trowawayacc]

This is very intersting. How can a server operate in mirror without having half od the mirror? What OS are you using?

[@danielmcgowan9534]

Ideally the second batch of drives are bought later so they are not from the same production run.

[@ChristopherHailey]

This video surprised me, I wasn't expecting too much, just "no you're wrong" statements. Instead here is a really good breakdown of myths or partial truths and how they are not true, but also a good explanation of how these beliefs came about, either through misunderstanding or obsolete info. Really good content here. I have a basic NAS that I built myself but I do see some pre-builts are getting good.

[@argee55]

Thank you for this video. I purchased a Ugreen NAS and have yet to set it up because of all the negative comments about NAS. This video has helped rethink my hesitation to set it up. Thanks again.

[@CherylSheehan-e5r]

Love the clear instructions, awesome!

[@penguinjoe1961]

In my own case, 2.5gbe is the best I can do. My house was built 10 years ago and wired with Cat 5e ethernet. 2.5gbe is perfectly happy working over that wiring. 10gbe is not. To use 10gbe, I would have to rewire my home with either cat7/8 or fiber. I for one am not willing to make that move when 2.5gbe is easily usable by my devices and allows me to fully leverage my internet speed (1.5gb down , 1gb up). I fully agree with everything you have put out there.

[@MrPir84free]

Precisely.. However, my home is not wired for anything, not really. Too lazy to wire it correctly; mainly because I'm not sure I am going to stay here beyond the next two years.

[@jjones2582]

In some circumstances you might still be able to make use of 10 Gbe on the NAS if you can locate it next to the switch and have multiple PCs accessing the NAS at 2.5 Gbe simultaneously.

[@Brancliff]

I'm a QNAP user and- I dont love its software either. Its not great. But as far as the app store goes, I don't think it being bad is a huge factor, because docker is where the cool programs are really at

[@Nasguy-b7q]

@@Brancliff once you setup it up and use it in production qnap runs great. It has apps that work with out issues. The hardware and features are really the best value.

[@pelle7771]

It is quite the other way around. You always need to have one slot free for an additional drive. Because it is needed to expand your storage. If you want to replace a drive with a bigger one - you have to install a new, bigger drive parallel to your existing storage and can Press "replace drive". Otherwise, you have to remove a live drive, destroying your RAID redundancy and rebuild the RAID without the protection. To prevent this, you always need a slot free.

[@paulz4632]

Its great to see Asustor now with there new lockstore gen 3 with 10gbe mid range Nas's onboard and qnap with the 262 etc where a pci 10gbe card can get you those nice 700+mps speeds with a nas under 600AU, with sdd or nvme instant 10gbe speed! 10gbe routers are cheaper now often on special on amazon with 2 x10 ports at least.

[@VickieRapp-e5j]

This was exactly the guide I needed, thanks!

[@nascompares]

No worries. Have a bangin' weekend

[@vipin_thegame]

I just bought my first NAS, the Terra-Master F2-424. Wondering if I made the mistake of not investing in the 4 bay model. Thank you for clarifying a lot of my questions and concerns. I didn’t even have to ask you 😀

[@denvera1g1]

I really like the EXOS drives, man are they fast, Never thought i'd see a 7200RPM drive see 300MB/s sequential

[@throwaway6478]

It's a data density thing: if you have (say) a 20TB drive, it has twice as much data going under the head every revolution than a 10TB. Ironwolfs of the same capacity will deliver similar performance - my 16TB 'wolfies deliver 270MB/sec on the outer tracks, my 14TBs do late 250s.

[@agh8459]

@10:40 or thereabouts; had to LOL and rewatch a bit because of your hoodie and the sound of seagulls in the background... ... and it kept going too. I'm gonna lose it over here...

[@frankbierschneider8785]

WELL DONE! Looking forward to the DS1525 with >= 2,5 GB NIC

[@paulz4632]

Its good to see 2.5gbe as the standard now as thats the speed of old Mechanical drives in raid being bang for buck ie ironwolf/Seagate 4TB which is great value as 2.5gbe is standard on most PC boards or a usb 2/5gbe adapter is like $20 giving you 280mps on a budget nas at last..

[@Emmanuel-wo4gs]

Very interesting 👍👍👍👍thank you

[@Nasguy-b7q]

I stand corrected i may have said Synology locks drives, i was annoyed by them and won't do that again. 100% agree with 2.5 gbe, cheap and nice performance. Lastly, you still seem a bit anti QNAP, as I have become anti Synology recently. The OS is great and over the last few years has been just as good as Synology overall, I don't see any hits for security, they leaned their lesson to me. Synology is slicker but once you setup it isn't an issue. Quts on smaller systems is a really solid move.

[@alch3mi5t.]

"needing" hardware decoding on a NAS drive for Plex. Running Plex on a NAS is almost always second best to using a NAS for data and a separate unit for plex server. A Mini PC wiill destroy any consumer NAS as a Plex Server. TBF, this channel eats on the transcoding vids. 100-200 bucks mini pc plus separate NAS. Easier and cheaper and more reliable for almost everyone.

[@AABB-oi7hv]

What is the power consumption of this Mini PC?

[@daklhs6460]

From 5w to 45w. There are some really power efficient, there are some really powerful.

[@sleepingwonder]

Seagulls ran away seeing your hoodie

[@junior-OG]

lol

[@Локомотивный_Белый]

Regarding RAID0... IMHO, I personally wouldn't enjoy manually rebuilding the array every time one of the disks fails, and then copying data from the backup. "Saving" money with RAID0, I'll get N hours of machine downtime and time spent on restoring data from the backup. I think RAID0 is good when used to combine several RAID1/5/6. Then you can get the best of all worlds.

[@Cosminmzq]

Hi, i'd like to thank you for your hard work. I've been watching plenty of your videos lately and i wonder... Any chance in seeing a new synology nas with i5 1235u or at least a powerfull intel cpu than the ryzen r1600 ?

[@ItisImarko]

Donyou have any video for changing "the guts" of synology...i have 1513+ and I think time is for change of electronic but would reuse housing...

[@TazzSmk]

15:28 - what about 5Gbe? upcoming PC Intel motherboards seem to be flooded with 5Gbe onboard NICs, gimmick or no?

[@jasperverkroost]

Some of the newest AMD Ryzen motherboards also have 5Gbe.

[@RTX1070]

Can you try orico 5 bay thunderbolt 3

[@RTX1070]

ORICO-9858T3

[@EduardoRubioLogan]

Sooo any time frame using other os with Zimacubes ? hehe

[@Nasguy-b7q]

Would you please show a video upgrading the 453e to quts?

[@nascompares]

Hi bud. I would, but I haven't got a TS-453E in the studio. Will ask QNAP UK if I can loan one

[@Nasguy-b7q]

@@nascompares thank you! I look forward to it!

[@pbrigham]

I can't find the link for the video where you are comparing Intel vs Arm CPUs.

[@Tiberit]

Text mixed up in 9:41 . Intel x86 turns out to be Realtek 1619b and Ryzen Embedded R1600 is somehow ARM.

[@nascompares]

Cheers for the heads up bud

[@superangrybrit]

Many of us were wishing for the jump would be to 10gbps. Just like when it went from 100mbps to 1gbps. 2.5gbps feels like it's not gonna be around for long. Just buying time. Cheers!

[@throwaway6478]

10GbE switches and cards are cheap and easy these days, especially second-hand. The issue is the cost of running Cat6[a] or (worse) fibre, because most houses, if they're wired at all, are wired with Cat5, or Cat5e at best. I've run 10GbE over Cat5e, and it's not a pleasant experience if your cable is more than a metre long. I ended up biting the bullet and running OM4 all over the house - it's not pretty, but the effortless 10GbE, with the option to go to 25GbE (or even 100GbE if I win Lotto), made it worth it.

[@TazzSmk]

8:26 - would be nice if NASes had more granular permission settings, such as for ex. on Synology having read+write access in Drive/FileStation, but only read access via SMB, to my understanding such thing isn't possible within one user account

[@throwaway6478]

This is why I use Windows Server (shh, don't tell Microsoft *coughKMS_VL_ALLcough*), with its superlative NTFS/ReFS permission system.

[@TazzSmk]

@@throwaway6478 how do you manage privacy (telemetry) and antivirus flagging your files on WServer? ReFS is nice though

[@arielo9332]

do you have a video about NAS security? a NAS will solve a lot of my problems, but having it 24/7 online and connected to external internet connection (for phone's photos backup) seems like a big security risk.

[@DavidM2002]

I'm pretty sure that NASCompares has done some security videos recently. As have SpaceRex and WunderTech. All good and knowledgeable channels. SpaceRex did one about setting up the Synology firewall and why you probably don't need to and is well worth a watch. Although Synology and QNAP and all the others run different software, many of their security features are similar in function.

[@shaunerickson2858]

I've heard you mention, in this and at least one other video, "USB4 10Gbe". I'll be damned if I can find any of these for sale, here in the US. I only find them for Thunderbolt. In fact, I bought one of the Sonnet Tech Thunderbolt 10Gbe SFP+ adapters, only to discover that my PC doesn't have Thunderbolt (d'oh!) - only USB4, so I can't use it. Could really use a USB4 version, but can't find one. What are these mythical adapters you speak of?

[@JeremyFickler]

Love channel, watch just about every video. Thoughts on doing a DAS 2024 video, simply for Beelink with plex and a DAS connected? Wondering what the latest and greatest DAS's are on the market! Anyhoo, keep up the great work

[@nascompares]

Working on that now (sort of), as I have 4 great ones in mind, but a 4th one is now in the studio being tested and, if it's as good as it promises, will be in the video as #5. Otherwise, never had issues with the Terramaster D5/D8, and if you are looking at USB4, I have nothing but positive words to say about Orico

[@davemckewan4450]

Yes but do you hate seagulls.... I ditched Synology because of the crap they started with the drives and, for me at least, 2.5gbps is about the best I'm likely to get in this house. It's good to see it go but until everything is at least 2.5 even that, as a full network, is overkill. Good vid as always.

[@alphaomega5017]

Mechanical hard drive prices have gone up due to scarcity 10 tb

[@lextacy2008]

I have an ULTRA question. If I trigger a multi Nas transfer using 4 nas machines and use a desktop and make the 4 nas file transfer to each other. Each machine has a gigabit card. Apparently the desktop that facilitates the file transfers will only distribute its own 1 gigabit link forcing each Nas to only transfer at 25%. The problem is the desktop is not sending or receiving files, its just facilitating the transfer using windows explorer with like 8 windows open. Whats going on here?

[@throwaway6478]

This is a good question, and the answer is "the computer who initiates the copy is the one that runs it". Essentially, you're pulling the file(s) down to your client machine at gigabit speeds, then sending it to the other machine(s), also at gigabit speeds. Do this four times simulatenously, and you only have 250 megabits per copy to play with. As such, for maximum performance, do the copy either on the machine that has the file(s), or on the machine that you want to copy the file(s) to, to cut out any middleman.

[@coolraul07]

0:41 - Wrong. NAS drives objectively DO (unit) cost more than consumer drives. HOWEVER, that doesn't mean that they aren't worth it or that they don't provide better bang for the buck.

[@nascompares]

Isn't the next sentence I say "well .. technically yes, but .."?

[@MyNameIsBucket]

Yeah, I'm still not going to pay a premium for drives designed to grind away 24/7 when I'm the only person who will be using my Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks.

[@akanar_1924]

Over a decade working as a data center tech for 5 different data centers including fortune 5 companies and about a decade using TrueNAS. When I complain about Proprietary closed source trash in this. I am talking about the whole package. Closed source OS, Hardware, locking you in the ecosystem, planed obsolescence, etc. A NAS should always work until the hardware dies. Not when OS support ends and not when parts become unavailable. I have the same NAS I had 10 years ago... and it does not have any of the same hardware or even software it had on it 10 years ago but it is still the same NAS because I replaced 1 part at a time. This is the way. 1. NAS drives cost more... buy refurbished name brand enterprise HDDs. don't bother with new drives. "NAS" drives or otherwise. This is due to how the market is going and HDDs are being pushed out for flash. They are just too cheap and last too long. Don't forget to burn them in by wiping them and check SMART data before building your array. You should be doing this even with new HDDs btw. You also don't want to buy HDDs with serial numbers close together as they are more likely to fail around similar times. This is hard to do with new HDDs. I know people won't believe this but it is a thing. HDDs with very close serial numbers are a lot more likely to have the same kind of defect that causes one to fail will cause another to fail. It works just like silicon lottery with CPU overclocking. 2. Synology... Proprietary closed source planed obsolescence trash. 3. Fully populate nas... TrueNAS will support expanding a pool by 1 drive in the next release. So you can start with a smaller number of HDD now. Unraid has had this feature for a long time. TrueNAS users is where this statement came from I think and other devices that can't expand by 1 HDD. VDEVs imo should not be used unless you are getting out of the consumer level of numbers of drives in the system. Like when you have 20+ drives but as a consumer why do you need a single pool that large. Which comes with risks in catastrophic events. If you have vdevs you probably have multiple systems with 20+ HDDs. If you can't expand by 1 HDD in an existing pool and you just add another pool. You are wasting a lot of bays just on parity disks. 4. Offline NAS... People confusing "offline" with "air gap" . 5. ARM NAS... TrueNAS and UNRAID do not support ARM. Only OMV does, which is meh. So therefore ARM NAS is shit. Because proprietary closed source operating systems are shit. Look no further than the most popular one Windows. 6. QNAP... Closed source OS is shit. 7. RAID 0... Yep. RAID0 is great for caching and data processing (copy data to RAID0, process it, move processed data to redundant RAID, delete original) 8. 2.5Gbe... Yeah. data centers are at like 400Gbe now and still waiting for 10Gbe consumer to fill the market more. 2.5Gbe is better than still waiting.

[@waynebagger643]

2.5gbe... remember to breathe, Robbie!! In through the nose, hold for three seconds then out through the mouth slowly 😂 Have a good weekend.

[@JBlongz]

2.5gbe should the minimum in 2025.

[@ConorHanley]

If Synology uses HDs not on its compatible drives list as a means to get out of all/part of its warranty than you might as well consider Synology as 'blocking' other drives in effect. Just another form of Scumbaggery one has come to expect from Synology and other tech companies' I'd advise anyone not to buy any Synology devices.

[@RogerioPereiradaSilva77]

Couldn't have said it better myself. I also think that people greatly overstate the benefits of DSM and the ecosystem around it. Yeah, it is simple to set up but that's about it. All of that functionality can be reproduced elsewhere with some fiddling - even with open source alternatives - and by doing that, one is not beholden to Synology's draconian terms of service and warranty nor its frankly pathetic hardware offerings in the "enthusiast/prosumer" space.

[@Mr76Pontiac]

To "block" something means to outright prevent use. The ability to take any drive and plug it in and actually use it means that it's not "blocked". You taking that drive and putting it into the unit means that there's nothing that Syn will do to help you get out of a problem IF the drive is not on their list of tested and working drives. The drives themselves have their own on board controllers, their own firmware, and their own specifications and implementations of the IDE/SATA/SAS/NVME protocols. There is absolutely a standard, and there's absolutely additional features and functions that each drive model will have that may not be present that the Syn OS at the very low level uses to ensure that your data communications are working properly between the two controllers (The mobo and the drives controller).

[@WatsitTooyah]

I don't think describing the difference with ARM and x86 as relating to compression is accurate. My understanding is that ARM uses an instruction set that is more fundamental and basic. This has the effect of it being easier to engineer software and hardware implementations that are simpler and more efficient than x86 architecture.

[@WatsitTooyah]

The most significant difference is that x86 has to handle variable length instructions size, where ARM uses fixed length instructions. The mathematical gymnastics that x86 hardware and software together perform has more overhead than the relatively simpler implementation on ARM. And x86 is less efficient with decoding, generally speaking.

[@MrPir84free]

Been using QNAP NAS's for 7+ years. The company has had problems; but so has most other products, like Windows, various other NAS's, Linux, etc. Gotten used to the software. I do wish it wasn't an ARM system, mainly because it's not as easy to find something else to run on it besides what came with it .. If there's a better alternative, well.. Overall, fairly satisfied.

[@nascompares]

That's a fair and balanced viewpoint. Fairplay man

[@rcmc88]

There is no such creture as a seagull they are just called Gulls, the only reason people call them seagulls is because they are often found buy the seaside. But they are just called Gulls

[@MIAMIC70]

Who fucking cares?

[@georgec2932]

If it's a myth then why do Synology not allow me to use any m.2 drives other than their own in my DS923+ ? Technically you said hard drives, but I think my point stands :) Its anti-consumer behaviour from them.

[@nascompares]

You are bang on right! I wanted to stick to HDDs for the most part, but yeah, their stance on NVMe SSD Pools is kinda bonkers

[@georgec2932]

@@nascompares thanks for the response! have you tried one of the scripts on GitHub that get around the compatibility list? I would like to use some m.2 drives in a storage pool but at the same time I don’t want risk breaking DSM. The capacity and cost of synology branded m.2 drives are ridiculous.

[@DJDocsVideos]

2 factor auth is the new snake oil.

[@JBlongz]

It’s effective for the majority. There are relatively fewer threat actors leasing access to backdoor for cellular networks.

[@throwaway6478]

This. The number of email, forum etc. accounts I've lost because of this scam is breathtaking.

[@d-tech3190]

Do you really hate seagulls?

[@nascompares]

Go eat chips on the pier at Brighton and ask me again!

[@d-tech3190]

@@nascompares Personal pain, huh. By the way, I've sent you an email regarding some hoops I had to jump through while attempting to recovery data from a failed QNAP. If you think it would make good content, I can tell you the full story.

[@blathum9]

Sorry RAID 0 make very little sense in a NAS I can see your point but it kind of like saying I can drive my car down the street with my leg out the door because I am a careful driver. Are you going to notice the speed difference with RAID 0????

[@frankwong9486]

Qnap : not that great but work, better hardware than synology but now those china brand do it better on spec Synology: been ok software overpriced hardware but after those anti consumer step i could say avoid it like SMR drives Terramaster: great hardware , barely workable software Ugreen nas : great hardware wih a little bit lock , still raw operating software 45drives : premium non made in china thing ,robust chassis ,price could broke the bank Asustor : been innovative but current product spec was a bit outdate and need renew (n5095 in 2024 ? Get n100 at least mate 😂) Diy soultion: it depends how much time and cash want to spend . And how much knowledge you have.

[@Nasguy-b7q]

@@frankwong9486 i dont know why qnap isn't great, they work great for me...

[@zMeul]

RAID 0 is not invalid, but has a very truly limited use niche and the vast majority who use this at home will not have a back-up for it, thus making it's use just idiotic --- 10gbe is older than 2.5gbe and the fact that the industry still asks a pretty penny for it is .. again, idiotic

[@nadtz]

Buy secondhand and save a bundle. I got 3 10GbE SFP+ nics and dac's for about $100 and my current switch (3 sfp+ ports and 8 1GbE) for ~$150 back in 2020. Finally outgrown that switch and the Mikrotik I'm going to be replacing it with is currently about $220 on Amazon. Not 'cheap' exactly but not ridiculously expensive either.

[@DJDocsVideos]

RAID 0 is a horrible idea and real Filesystems handle that use case much better with there native Data striping implementations. You can'tt convince me of a "home user" use case where a pool of GEN 5 SSDs and a nice big RAM cache aren't doing a better job than plain RAID 0. Than again I do actual storrage on big irons since the 90's so what do I know?

[@zapman2100]

all NAS need to just move to 10GBe while this might increase price in the beginning if everything just switched to it the cost due to scale would lower the price.

[@thanos1000000fc]

Why do you keep saying that RAID is not a backup?

[@Mr76Pontiac]

Because it's not. RAID is just a bunch of drives trying to keep your data safe via several methods of bit-checking and redundancy checks via software (In the controller card or via your OS software). Having your data in one spot being protected against drive failures is NOT a backup method. A backup is when you take a snapshot of your data (Simple file copy, for example) and move it elsewhere to a different device. That different device could be a different physical drive in your machine, it could be out on the cloud through various vendors, or just to a DVD/CDR. A "backup" consists of having multiple copies of your data, not how a set of drives protects itself. Think of it this way. If you're lucky enough to own two cars for you and yourself alone, you have a "backup car". You can only drive one car at a time, so, if one of those cars breaks down for whatever reason, you have another car to get you to where you need to be and get parts to fix that broken car. RAID doesn't do that kind of thing. It doesn't magically give you access to a button to go and repair your car for the short term while you use said "broken" car to go fetch parts to fix your "broken" car. RAID doesn't even cover being a tow truck to take your car to a repair shop because you're still out a car while it's being repaired.

[@ironfist7789]

Partly because if the data gets damaged (through a deletion or some other event) then it is only one real unit. If there is an electrical surge, corruption through OS, or some sort of failure, the whole box can be compromised. That doesn't mean that it is not useful though for other issues.

[@MoD_Master_Of_Disaster_]

You might want to google RAID, cause when you aks such a question, you really don’t have a clue on what RAID is.

[@thanos1000000fc]

@@Mr76Pontiac You're absolutely right that RAID isn’t a backup in the traditional sense, and no one’s arguing that it replaces an external backup. But dismissing RAID's role entirely by saying "it's not a backup" is oversimplifying the situation. RAID does give you a form of resilience, which, for many users, is essential. Think of it this way: RAID is more like having spare parts for your car already on hand, so if something breaks (like a drive), you can replace it immediately without downtime. You're still driving while your system rebuilds itself in the background. Sure, RAID isn’t going to save you from ransomware or accidental deletions-that’s what external backups are for-but in the real world, drive failures are a major risk, and RAID does protect against that. It's like having an auto mechanic riding with you, ready to fix things on the fly, which is far more useful than people give it credit for.

[@thanos1000000fc]

@@MoD_Master_Of_Disaster_ And how am I supposed to backup 50TB of data without going bankrupt?

[@StenIsaksson]

If RAID 0 is for idiots then a single drive is also for idiots. If a RAID 0 fails, you loose all data. If a single drive fails, you loose all data.

[@ironfist7789]

Also wonder how much data gets lost on all the usb keys out there. It is worse than just one drive because you have greater odds of one of 2 drives failing than one drive failing

[@richardkenan2891]

If your single drive fails, you're screwed. If one of 3 other drives not connected to it in a raid fails, you're fine. If any of those 4 drives fails and they're in a raid 0 array, you're screwed. Raid 0 is far less reliable than single drives. And single drives are still unreliable. Raid 0 is just playing Russian roulette with only one empty chamber.

[@laustinspeiss]

Sounds like you haven’t built the array properly. About a year after firing up my NAS, I lost one drive from my RAID 1 pair. Replaced the drive, all fixed no problems. The hardest problem was identifying ‘which’ physical drive was which ! Two years later, happy camper.

[@blcjck8121]

First of all RAID0 is not really RAID despite the name. No Redundancy. Second, RAID0 is at least double the failure risk of a single drive. More as the number of drives increases.

[@laustinspeiss]

@@StenIsaksson * lose