Looking to buy a NAS to store graphics files long-term.
-
We have a client who is looking to store a fairly large amount of large graphics files for as much as a year, with roughly 1 TB of new data created monthly. I have my own thoughts on what might be the best solution for this, but I was hoping for some community feedback.
Thanks, everyone!
-
So 12 TB total? Or just to start?
-
Is this archival? Or does this have performance needs?
-
At the low end, you can do 10TB on RAID 1 on a two bay Synology or ReadyNAS.
If you include yesterday's announced 14TB helium filled drives, you can do all 12TB plus extra.
-
Same theory but four bay with RAID 10 will double performance and let you use cheaper 8TB drives to get to 16TB usable.
-
-
I don't think that RAID is a major concern. These files seem more like "it would be nice to have a copy around in case we want it, but it's not a huge deal if we don't". The high number thrown out there was 18TB, ot it could be 12TB is enough, or they might end up saying that they can make due with 6TB.
-
If there is long term growth, how big will it get? Rack mount units are a bit more expensive.
SAM-SD is, of course, totally viable and a Dell R510 from xByte loaded with big drives would be very affordable and must faster than a little desktop NAS box. The R510 can do 12 bays, SATA or NL-SAS on RAID 6. I know it will do 2TB drives. That's 20TB usable in a 2U rack mount. If a firmware updates allows for bigger drives then 30TB - 40TB would be very affordable.
-
The function is to be a share that files are placed into and can be grabbed by the printing software to go to the big printer, but then they stay there long-term, until they age out.
-
@art_of_shred said in Looking to buy a NAS to store graphics files long-term.:
I don't think that RAID is a major concern. These files seem more like "it would be nice to have a copy around in case we want it, but it's not a huge deal if we don't". The high number thrown out there was 18TB, ot it could be 12TB is enough, or they might end up saying that they can make due with 6TB.
There are inflection points. For low priority copies, at 10TB or less, a two bay NAS is basically unbeatable.
-
I also get the feeling that low price is an important factor. It doesn't seem that all players are convinced they really need to hang on to those files at all.
-
Investing in something more generally useful might be worth looking at. A dedicated NAS that has only one purpose might be a management pain long term.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Looking to buy a NAS to store graphics files long-term.:
Investing in something more generally useful might be worth looking at. A dedicated NAS that has only one purpose might be a management pain long term.
Such as?
-
@art_of_shred said in Looking to buy a NAS to store graphics files long-term.:
I also get the feeling that low price is an important factor. It doesn't seem that all players are convinced they really need to hang on to those files at all.
Could always just get a USB external drive and call it a day.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Looking to buy a NAS to store graphics files long-term.:
@art_of_shred said in Looking to buy a NAS to store graphics files long-term.:
I also get the feeling that low price is an important factor. It doesn't seem that all players are convinced they really need to hang on to those files at all.
Could always just get a USB external drive and call it a day.
This needs to be available to multiple users and computers on the network.
-
@art_of_shred said in Looking to buy a NAS to store graphics files long-term.:
@scottalanmiller said in Looking to buy a NAS to store graphics files long-term.:
Investing in something more generally useful might be worth looking at. A dedicated NAS that has only one purpose might be a management pain long term.
Such as?
Something bigger than could be used for live files as well. At such a small scale paying for servers for each little need is not efficient. Why not grow the existing storage by that amount, for example?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Looking to buy a NAS to store graphics files long-term.:
@art_of_shred said in Looking to buy a NAS to store graphics files long-term.:
@scottalanmiller said in Looking to buy a NAS to store graphics files long-term.:
Investing in something more generally useful might be worth looking at. A dedicated NAS that has only one purpose might be a management pain long term.
Such as?
Something bigger than could be used for live files as well. At such a small scale paying for servers for each little need is not efficient. Why not grow the existing storage by that amount, for example?
Existing storage is a data drive in a user's desktop. I suppose that could be added to with another hard drive.
-
@art_of_shred said in Looking to buy a NAS to store graphics files long-term.:
@scottalanmiller said in Looking to buy a NAS to store graphics files long-term.:
@art_of_shred said in Looking to buy a NAS to store graphics files long-term.:
I also get the feeling that low price is an important factor. It doesn't seem that all players are convinced they really need to hang on to those files at all.
Could always just get a USB external drive and call it a day.
This needs to be available to multiple users and computers on the network.
1 How does it have "needs" when they don't think that they need it at all?
2 anything it is attached to could share it out. Just attach it to the existing storage pool.
-
@art_of_shred said in Looking to buy a NAS to store graphics files long-term.:
@scottalanmiller said in Looking to buy a NAS to store graphics files long-term.:
@art_of_shred said in Looking to buy a NAS to store graphics files long-term.:
@scottalanmiller said in Looking to buy a NAS to store graphics files long-term.:
Investing in something more generally useful might be worth looking at. A dedicated NAS that has only one purpose might be a management pain long term.
Such as?
Something bigger than could be used for live files as well. At such a small scale paying for servers for each little need is not efficient. Why not grow the existing storage by that amount, for example?
Existing storage is a data drive in a user's desktop. I suppose that could be added to with another hard drive.
So they feel that the "live" storage doesn't need a server. But the "unneeded archive" does? Something doesn't jive there.
-
The graphics RIP software opens files that are currently on the lead graphics guy's hard drive, and sends them to the printer. That space will be too small going forward, so they want a storage space that will be adequate, that they can point the RIP software to, to grab graphics files. It's that simple. Because of the possible size they are thinking about providing, I wondered if a NAS was the best move for the buck. Maybe I'm not accurate on what things cost, but heading towards a server doesn't seem to be a cost-effective solution.
