10tb or Two 6tb

[Joe11221]

So, I need to upgrade my storage and am thinking of building a NAS. I was wondering if I should go with two 6TB X300 Toshiba HDD's or 1 10TB Ironwolf by Seagate. The two 6TB drives are cheaper then the IronWolf, and I can always use one as a backup, but it would be super badass to have a 10tb disk and will allow for later expansion. Remember, speed isn't an issue because it's being transferred over 1gb ethernet. What do you think I should get?

[AresKrieger]

imo 2 drive is better than one so long as you have available ports, though I don't know how the drive's quality compares

[Joe11221]

Just now, AresKrieger said:

imo 2 drive is better than one so long as you have available ports, though I don't know how the drive's quality compares

hmmm. Explain why you think they're better

[RS2007GOD]

If your gonna use the xtra 2gb get the 2x6gb if not go for the ballin 10tb drive  

[79wjd]

If your building a NAS then even with 2 6tb drives you have plenty of room to upgrade/expand in the future. 

 

I'd take two 6tb drives over a single 10th drive anyday since you can/should run some form of redundancy if you care about your data. Although I would personally go with drives designed for a NAS environment (like WD Reds -- TLER is very important for any form of RAID, and I don't know if those drives support TLER OR if they are designed for 24/7 use). 

[Oshino Shinobu]

Do you need 10TB? For a NAS, I would really advise having some form of RAID or at least a backup to ensure you don't lose data. It's going to cost a lot more to create a RAID or effective backup solution for a 10TB drive, even if you're not using all 10TB.

[Joe11221]

Just now, RS2007GOD said:

If your gonna use the xtra 2gb get the 2x6gb if not go for the ballin 10tb drive  

lol, TB* those 12gb wont do me any good

[AresKrieger]

2 minutes ago, Joe11221 said:

hmmm. Explain why you think they're better

More options, you can use one for a certain set of files, as a backup, or in raid where as the one drive's only advantage in this case is it takes less space (assuming quality is comparable), and you get 2 extra TB with the 2x6

[Joe11221]

 I guess I'm going with the two 6TB's

Thanks for your opinion everyone!

 

....

Now to build a NAS...

[Joe11221]

3 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

If your building a NAS then even with 2 6tb drives you have plenty of room to upgrade/expand in the future. 

 

I'd take two 6tb drives over a single 10th drive anyday since you can/should run some form of redundancy if you care about your data. Although I would personally go with drives designed for a NAS environment (like WD Reds -- TLER is very important for any form of RAID, and I don't know if those drives support TLER OR if they are designed for 24/7 use). 

 

Well, I'm not 100% sure if I'm going to be using them 24/7 as I still have school and won't be using it that much. 

[bgibbz]

7 minutes ago, Joe11221 said:

So, I need to upgrade my storage and am thinking of building a NAS. I was wondering if I should go with two 6TB X300 Toshiba HDD's or 1 10TB Ironwolf by Seagate. The two 6TB drives are cheaper then the IronWolf, and I can always use one as a backup, but it would be super badass to have a 10tb disk and will allow for later expansion. Remember, speed isn't an issue because it's being transferred over 1gb ethernet. What do you think I should get?

Maybe 3 6tb drives in raid 5?

[Joe11221]

Just now, bgibbz said:

Maybe 3 6tb drives in raid 5?

Well, an ideal solution would not to have it in Raid 5 but rather have an external drive so the second one will have a much longer lifespan and is less likely to fail.

[knightslugger]

With drives that damn big, raid 5 is asking for complete failures as a resilvering of a new drive is a HIGHLY intensive process. If one failed, chances are high another is right behind it. Raid 5 only allows for a single disk failure before you are one drive away from complete data loss.

 

hell no. RAID 5 is NO GOOD.

[Joe11221]

Just now, knightslugger said:

With drives that damn big, raid 5 is asking for complete failures as a resilvering of a new drive is a HIGHLY intensive process. If one failed, chances are high another is right behind it. Raid 5 only allows for a single disk failure before you are one drive away from complete data loss.

 

hell no. RAID 5 is NO GOOD.

 

What I was thinking exactly

[79wjd]

4 minutes ago, knightslugger said:

With drives that damn big, raid 5 is asking for complete failures as a resilvering of a new drive is a HIGHLY intensive process. If one failed, chances are high another is right behind it. Raid 5 only allows for a single disk failure before you are one drive away from complete data loss.

 

hell no. RAID 5 is NO GOOD.

The 'guaranteed' failure rate with large drives in Raid 5 is based on worse case figures provided by the manufacturer (where in reality, surprisingly, the failure rate is orders of magnitudes lower). With that said, I would still personally err on the side of caution and assume worst case scenarios (which is why I would go RAID 6). 

 

6 minutes ago, Joe11221 said:

Well, an ideal solution would not to have it in Raid 5 but rather have an external drive so the second one will have a much longer lifespan and is less likely to fail.

ummmm..... that sounds more like the occasional backup (which isn't the same as redundancy), which you would want anyway. 

[knightslugger]

Even RAID1 is no good if you're looking to use one drive less than another. what it sounds like you need is some sort of periodical backup scheduler. a backup to a backup... which is kinda silly unless it's off site.

 

honestly NAS drives like the Seagate IronWolf or WD Reds are designed for 24/7 operation. If you build your NAS around the idea that you will experience simultaneous multiple drive failures you are already WAY ahead of the class.

 

RAID6 with a ready spare hooked up and ready to dance is what you want. It is not inexpensive, but precious data is priceless. I know i'd fall into a deep depression if i found out my por-i mean photo collection suddenly disappeared because i failed to predict the now modern high likelyhood of multiple drive failures.

[knightslugger]

that's not how RAID0 works...

[79wjd]

1 minute ago, knightslugger said:

that's not how RAID0 works...

You'd have to be a moron to put (your only) two drives in RAID 0 in a NAS. If for whatever reason RAID wasn't an affordable option, then you would just do JBOD.

[knightslugger]

Just now, djdwosk97 said:

You'd have to be a moron to put (your only) two drives in RAID 0 in a NAS.

agree 100% unless performance is the name of the game, and not data.

[crysilis]

41 minutes ago, RS2007GOD said:

If your gonna use the xtra 2gb get the 2x6gb if not go for the ballin 10tb drive  

where would he get the xtra 2gb?