It is a Good price but sometimes people cant see past the ££££'s . intel CPU , so many more apps will run/ be compatible.
hokers
17 Jun 17#4
Not sure why I would want a 4-bay over a 2-bay. RAID-1 gives me redundancy right?
hokers
17 Jun 17#5
Not sure why I would want a 4-bay over a 2-bay. RAID-1 gives me redundancy right?
Gibss to hokers
17 Jun 174#6
Because you can double your capacity compared to a 2bay?
loveextasy to hokers
17 Jun 17#15
You can setup 2 disks as Raid1 for most important stuff, and other disks on their own or other types for more capacity, that's what I am doing
ersen1
17 Jun 175#7
still better off with the Gen8 HP Microserver
benjai to ersen1
17 Jun 17#11
Only if you're a geek.
OrribleHarry to ersen1
17 Jun 17#22
Not necessarily it is depending what you need it for and what software you intend to use on the HP.
The Synology will work out of the box with minimum configuration.
The HP is much more flexible but requires extensive configuration and knowledge to make it work.
kennethsross
17 Jun 17#8
awesome NAS, awesome price.
zizzles to kennethsross
17 Jun 17#9
Awesome comment
Asura to kennethsross
17 Jun 17#10
Everything is cool when you're part of a team...
ourdave
17 Jun 171#12
2 bay RAID 1 - lose one of your disks for redundancy
2 x 4TB = 4TB usable
4 bay RAID 5
4 x 4TB = 12TB usable...so your extra 2 disks is ALL usable.
It's obviously much more expensive, but if you can afford the money then its better to start off with this and 2 x 4TB, and then add 4TB disks going forward.
If you start off with a 2 bay NAS and 2 x 4TB disks, then you've got a significant layout to incrementally go up to 2 x 6TB...which only gives you 2TB extra.
In short: I've got a DS214 Play (and love it) but wish I'd splashed out 2 year ago and got a 4 bay...because now I've filled my 2 x 3TB disks and it's a big price hit to get 1TB more of usable space.
Tenex to ourdave
17 Jun 17#16
I have a 2 bay Synology but I'm tempted to get a second 2 bay just for media and situate it next to the TV rather than take the hit selling the existing and buying a 4 bay. Any thoughts?
windhoek to ourdave
17 Jun 17#25
Thanks for posting this sage advice; I actually ordered a 3TB WD Red to go with the NAS but cancelled the order for the HD as I really should start as I mean to go on and 4 x 4TB WD Red HDs is where I want to end up because that should give me plenty of storage capacity for the foreseeable future if not the rest of my life :wink:
unconfirmed to ourdave
18 Jun 17#29
RAID 5 with disks larger than 1TB is a bad idea. 4TB is just asking for trouble. May as well JBOD to get more space.
TomScrut to unconfirmed
19 Jun 17#34
I agree, RAID 6 at least or don't bother.
The principle of running RAID with just one redundancy is silly IMO. If one fails then the stress of restoring the array is then put onto the other drives increasing the odds of another one failing, and because the likelihood is that the drives are the same age that they are also at an age where they are more likely to fail during the restore. Still a small percentage chance, but if the data is valuable enough for RAID to begin with then it ought to be valuable enough to not want losing during a rebuild. Obviously RAID 6 isn't bullet proof, and other backups (especially cloud or in another building) are also recommended, but if there is (off the top of my head) a 2% chance of failure per drive restoring RAID 5 then that will be a 6% chance of being screwed on a 4 bay. With RAID 6 that would go to 0.24% (4% of 6%) which is far far safer than 6%! Of course the 2% chance is just a number picked from my head so could be more, could be less IRL but I think the maths involving that figure is correct.
Also worth noting I had two drives start to die within a few days of each other (lots of bad sectors) in my 413 so I had to replace them and rebuild my RAID.
![Fresh Breakfast Meat Box (Using code) @ Campbells Meat [Haggis / Lorne Sausage / Bacon / Black Pudding & More]](/images/topics/208684_1.jpg)
![[Xbox One] Q. u. b. e: Director's Cut on Deals with Gold](/images/topics/208716_1.jpg)
Opening post
Top comments
All comments (36)
https://uk.camelcamelcamel.com/Synology-DiskStation-DS416play-transcoding-DS416PLAY/product/B01GB9ZJ3Q
The Synology will work out of the box with minimum configuration.
The HP is much more flexible but requires extensive configuration and knowledge to make it work.
Everything is cool when you're part of a team...
2 x 4TB = 4TB usable
4 bay RAID 5
4 x 4TB = 12TB usable...so your extra 2 disks is ALL usable.
It's obviously much more expensive, but if you can afford the money then its better to start off with this and 2 x 4TB, and then add 4TB disks going forward.
If you start off with a 2 bay NAS and 2 x 4TB disks, then you've got a significant layout to incrementally go up to 2 x 6TB...which only gives you 2TB extra.
In short: I've got a DS214 Play (and love it) but wish I'd splashed out 2 year ago and got a 4 bay...because now I've filled my 2 x 3TB disks and it's a big price hit to get 1TB more of usable space.
I agree, RAID 6 at least or don't bother.
The principle of running RAID with just one redundancy is silly IMO. If one fails then the stress of restoring the array is then put onto the other drives increasing the odds of another one failing, and because the likelihood is that the drives are the same age that they are also at an age where they are more likely to fail during the restore. Still a small percentage chance, but if the data is valuable enough for RAID to begin with then it ought to be valuable enough to not want losing during a rebuild. Obviously RAID 6 isn't bullet proof, and other backups (especially cloud or in another building) are also recommended, but if there is (off the top of my head) a 2% chance of failure per drive restoring RAID 5 then that will be a 6% chance of being screwed on a 4 bay. With RAID 6 that would go to 0.24% (4% of 6%) which is far far safer than 6%! Of course the 2% chance is just a number picked from my head so could be more, could be less IRL but I think the maths involving that figure is correct.
Also worth noting I had two drives start to die within a few days of each other (lots of bad sectors) in my 413 so I had to replace them and rebuild my RAID.