I have an 1821+ with three 24TB drives and five 12TB drives with SHR1. In order to increase the size, I've been removing the 12TB drives and adding the 24TB drives. Rebuild is anywhere from 24 to 36 hours. I have 76TB of data on the RAID. It's a backup (with another backup) so there is no risk, but this has been an acceptable rebuild time given the size of the RAID array.
+ guaranteed data loss,. With URE 1 sector per 1^15 bytes read, it is 10 bad sectors per whole drive. Those drives should be used at least in a 4-drive RAID6 or a triple mirror.
My biggest concern is if a drive fails, you have an unbelievably long rebuild time after a replacement. During that time your data is at risk.. Given the rebuild is pretty intensive on the entire array, the risk a second failure is significantly increased - should another drive fail during the rebuild, all data is lost.. It goes without saying that this specific array size/type (really any type of data storage) needs to have a backup or be the backup for something else. But, yeah absolutely agree that data density has vastly increased and is affordable compared to yesteryears!
if you have data that REALLY MATTERS - use tape for cold backup. Rebuilding time in SOHO level platform with discs 10TB+ is ridiculous. You either go with SSD raids or stay under 6TBs.
At such a large size, SHR2 may be worth it for 5 drives. I'm using it for my 4 drive bay as I'm overseas a lot and it adds a little security. 2 drives failed in the same day a couple of months ago when it was in SHR1. My backups helped a lot, but they only protected my personal files. All the media were gone.
I currently have 3x16TB Toshiba MG08 in the same NAS. Still 8TB to go until I need to add a drive. Works excellent so far. My old 918+ is the backup with 2 of the same drives and two old 4TB drives. Most of the time powered down.
I notice that the 24TB Ironwolf drives don't indicate NAS on the label. Does that matter? Is there a difference between the Ironwolf Pro and Ironwolf Pro NAS labeled drives?
Yes they are bias towards their Synology drives. You can check in their website. My DS920+ has max of 8TB compatibility with Exos drives which is just plain nonsense.
One thing's for certain- Synology would never "verify" it. I love their NAS, but hate their approach to not verifying drives made by any manufacturer other than themselves- ridiculous!
A month ago I put together an 1823xs+, with all eight drives at 24TB. (RAID 6, with a hot spare, totaling the maximum capability before I needed more RAM). 10Gb Ethernet and it is quite fast. How long do you think it will take to rebuild if I lost a drive? Are there any other pitfalls I should consider? This is my first NAS. Thanks in advance, great videos.
I am switching to Exos due to the significant price differential. Further, Exos are rated at higher MTBF and workload in general, so a double win. I recently purchased a 20Tb Exos for almost £100 less than the Ironwolf Pro equivalent. In testing, it's no noisier than my 8Tb Ironwolf. So, why pay more for less?
I bought 4 off Exos X24 20TB, all four where dead on arrival one was beeping others were clicking badly, they wouldn't initialise in DS1821+ or PC, just waiting for my full refund. Was thinking of trying the iron wolf Pro next or Seagate Evo SSD 4TB
@@christopheroliver6747 Don't be put off. I've seen many such stories and reviews of drives being DOA. You have to remember that DOA drives are that way due to the handling they receive during shipping. To have that many drives DOA is most definitely an indicator of bad shipping. My Exos arrived in very thick bubble wrap. I spent 26 hours running an extended SMART scan on it before use and all was 100%. If you order an Ironwolf from the same suppliers using the same couriers as the Exos's, you may also find DOA drives. I had a newly installed WD Red scanned some years back and it had over 200 bad blocks. The person in the Post Office dropped the box (not bubble wrapped) which accounted for this. Further, be very careful using SSD's. I've spent months of time and hundred of Pounds trying to get a pair of Crucial MX500's to work in an DS223. All was well for months. However, rebooting it saw the volumes go critical and fail. The issue seems to be that the drive model couldn't be found during boot. I had to use an Synology HAT3300 HDD, which works fine.
Even if we optimistically assume that a RAID5/6 rebuild goes at the full 285 MB/s sequential speed, that would still take about 24 hours with one of these 24 TB drives
Question - how long did it take for the drives to be added in the storage pool? I have x4, 22TB Iron Wolf Pro's and just adding 1 of them took like 5 days I believe.
What would you recommend if you didn’t use Synology? I use truenas scale and it’s alright but I started with a 2 disk Mirror and you can’t just add more capacity. Pain. What would you recommend for scalable Home build? I’m considering UNRAID .
Would these drives work in a DS923+ NAS? I have Seagate Exos X20 20TB drives in it now. Normally I have used WD Red Pro drives but the WD Red Pro 20TB drives would not initialize in my DS923+ NAS.
Thinking about buying a new NAS soon, having a DS918 now, but I am planning to buy smaller disks, since when I need more storage, I guess it will be a couple of years from now, then I can buy new ones, instead of mixing a couple of years old drives with new ones. Isn’t that resonable to think that way?
I generally would leave some drive bays empty, is way cheaper to just buy an extra drive, then to replace all of your drives, especially if you dont end up needing it
Ok, 5 is not an issue. I am using a 1821+ .... But thinking of bigger systems: How many HDD should be in a RAID5/SHR1 at max? (HDD's per Pool; Probability of failure) Do you have a recommendation?
For NAS setup, even if the Seagate drives are 50% cheaper, I will not consider them. Reliability of the data outstrip the cost of cheap $/gb ones. i can't imagine how long rebuilding a 100tb raid storage from 1 drive failure.
That's always something I wrestle with after running updates. I have the 18TB WDs in a pair of RS2821RP+ rack units as well as a pair of DS1821+ boxes. After updating, I have to telnet into the rack units and turn off the compatibility warnings while no warnings pop up on the DS units.
@@SpaceRexWill Hi SpaceRex : can you please do a video on how to install a parental controls package on the SYNOLOGY NAS that would apply PARENTAL CONTROLS to the whole LAN network -- that would be wonderful please?
As well as having a ups ( same ups should be feeding both) make sure that you disable the per drive write cache on all drives (when using dx expander) this will slightly reduce the risk of total Pool destruction if the power or eSATA is lost to the dx expander
Good video, thanks. Can the 24TB drives be used in any Synology NAS? I'm running a DS1019+, DSM 6.2, single volume, SHR-2, BTRFS using five 10TB drives. I'm out of room, 80% utilization. This is my onsite backup NAS backing up a DS1520+ and four PCs. (I'm wishing that I had set it up with SHR rather than SHR-2.) Wanting to upgrade the HDDs in the DS1019+ I've searched the Synology website to find maximum drive size supported and I was unable to find a clear answer. Any info here would be appreciated.
I have 14TB drives in my 1019+ and 18TB drives in my 2419+'s i do not see a reason why 20 or 24TB drives would not be acceptable. But, your 1GB links will certainly bottleneck.. Not sure is there is a viable 2.5or 5GB usb nic option for that nas. Kudos for being smart and using SHR2, i truly disagree with raid 5 in most use cases, especially with the size of those drives and your considering 24TB drives, that is a great choice IMHO
Sad to see, how the industry is milking their audience with these drives, instead of releasing HAMR drives to the public… I’m not sure if they even going to do, or have market for those, when high density QLC SSDs are already on the corner
Not to speak ill of SpaceRex, he's doing what he has to make a few bucks. But to make it worse, you've got RUclips influencers pumping these drives when there are much larger drive capacities out there between 26TB and 30 plus terabytes. They just seem difficult're to get.
@@Suzukii-Kryptoif you can't get it whats the point? We all know there are larger better things in the world but let's be real if you can get it, it doesn't exist.
I think HAMR drives are eventually going to actually make it on the market, but I have been reading articles for like 5 years that they are just around the corner. I know some 30TB drives have been shipped as samples, but I dont think they are on mass production yet
@ For me, it seems, they want to squeeze out as much margin as possible from these old drives to finance the RnD they spent on the HAMR technology. The only advantage of rust drives are their capacity, but we already see 64TB qlc ssds for at least a year now… In 7mm size as well…
@ So it gives an over optimistic impression of performance, I’m not interested in that number myself,. I’d rather see results relating to copy large amounts of photo sized files.
@@debugin1227 No, it is not an optimistic impression of the performance. You just don’t understand the measurement. It’s like how a car company will list its car’s top speed, but not list every single speed limit the car can go at, because that would be dumb.
i havew an issue with the 1522+ I have large files they wont copy to a picture machine but if I use a qnap same file copies just fine what's going on here why using same nas different hardware it copies fine but different nas it copies to that machine that has issues explain this in a video and how I fix this using x299 and ds1522+
Not for Synology users (sad). 24TB seems like too much, if you have a 50% utilization rebuilding a single drive failure is going to take days. Outside highly redundant enterprise environments 20TB is already pushing it. With u.2 15TB ssd becoming mainstream (something you can buy in New Egg or B&H) we are just waiting for prices to go lower. Not a critique of the video, is excellent as always.
I would not worry about rebuild times. RAID is not a backup, and the likely hood of a dual drive failure is insanely rare. I have never had a single client fair to rebuild their storage pool with RAID5. Not saying it does not happen, but its not something to worry about if you have a good backup
@@SpaceRexWill Hi SpaceRex : can you please do a video on how to install a parental controls package on the SYNOLOGY NAS that would apply PARENTAL CONTROLS to the whole LAN network -- that would be wonderful please?
Nice to see ticking the Checksum Box when creating the share folder (why Synology disables this basic functionality and advertised feature of the nas is unknown)
He ain't. But many people still use Synology. It's somewhat crap but more or less reliable and has a certain reputation. Ugreen is new and their sw is somewhat half-baked, so if I'd take it out would be as a secondary only
1.RAID5? Don't think so. For greedy Gobsek as myself RAID is not an option. Every HDD have to be count, baby!. 2.650$-700$ a piece? You must be trippin. 3. For home users even most of 16TB HDDs on the market are on the verge of sound pollution they willing to cope with. But 24TB is a fckn orchestra.
$479.99.............. there i saved you 15minutes
thank me later ($399 on sale now)
lol, thank you
$399 now from the link he posted
How about I thank you now? Thank you!
These will be in synology compatibility list in 2037
Ha! Accurate. Worthless list lol
Raid 5 rebuild time : 1 googol year
I have an 1821+ with three 24TB drives and five 12TB drives with SHR1. In order to increase the size, I've been removing the 12TB drives and adding the 24TB drives. Rebuild is anywhere from 24 to 36 hours. I have 76TB of data on the RAID. It's a backup (with another backup) so there is no risk, but this has been an acceptable rebuild time given the size of the RAID array.
+ guaranteed data loss,. With URE 1 sector per 1^15 bytes read, it is 10 bad sectors per whole drive. Those drives should be used at least in a 4-drive RAID6 or a triple mirror.
My biggest concern is if a drive fails, you have an unbelievably long rebuild time after a replacement. During that time your data is at risk.. Given the rebuild is pretty intensive on the entire array, the risk a second failure is significantly increased - should another drive fail during the rebuild, all data is lost..
It goes without saying that this specific array size/type (really any type of data storage) needs to have a backup or be the backup for something else.
But, yeah absolutely agree that data density has vastly increased and is affordable compared to yesteryears!
if you have data that REALLY MATTERS - use tape for cold backup. Rebuilding time in SOHO level platform with discs 10TB+ is ridiculous. You either go with SSD raids or stay under 6TBs.
At such a large size, SHR2 may be worth it for 5 drives. I'm using it for my 4 drive bay as I'm overseas a lot and it adds a little security.
2 drives failed in the same day a couple of months ago when it was in SHR1. My backups helped a lot, but they only protected my personal files. All the media were gone.
16TB = £160
24TB = £477
I’ll stick with 16TB 😎
I can't wait for Synology to release their version in 10 Years time at twice the price. 🤣
Got 100Tb of storage:
*Stores a couple of compressed mp3s and gifs
Feeling sort of humiliated with my 6tb NAS hahahaha.
What I find interesting is the relatively small price differences between Ironwolf Pro drives and Exos Drives. So I often just spring for the Exos.
Ideally they are on the supported list by the time I need to expand my SHR-2 setup and swap my current 16TB/8TB mix to a 24TB/16TB mix.
That's just not going to happen
@@BoraHorzaGobuchul Well I can wait. Especially since here they sell for AUD$1,000 a pop. In a year or so that may have dropped somewhat.
I currently have 3x16TB Toshiba MG08 in the same NAS. Still 8TB to go until I need to add a drive. Works excellent so far. My old 918+ is the backup with 2 of the same drives and two old 4TB drives. Most of the time powered down.
I've got 5 of the 20TB Toshiba ones. They run like a champ.
I notice that the 24TB Ironwolf drives don't indicate NAS on the label. Does that matter? Is there a difference between the Ironwolf Pro and Ironwolf Pro NAS labeled drives?
Thats just branding on the label. They are NAS drives
it will be awesome accessing 100TB over 1gbe...
Have enough money for a $400 HDD but not for a $70 10Gbe card?
@ not all models have the ability to add a card
I’m currently upgrading all of my Exos 14TB with mix of IronWolf Pro and Exos 20TB in my 1618+ and 1520+. I use SHR-1
And we can still add the expansion to the PLUS. This is bananas :P
I needed to upgrade my DS1522+, and two of these seem like great options. :)
Maybe I missed it but what’s the price?
I got these for $480 a piece
Does synology put a limit on how big of storage you can go? I have a DS923+. Would this be too much for it?
No limit. I installed 2 WD Red Pro 24tb in my DS918+ and all rebuilt fine and useable as one would expect
Yes they are bias towards their Synology drives. You can check in their website. My DS920+ has max of 8TB compatibility with Exos drives which is just plain nonsense.
@@mredizon00are you talking compatibility list doesn't list them, or system refuses to use them? Cause these are two different things
My hope is that if these get made en masse, it hopefully drives dowm price for 16TB drives.
WD beginning to push 26tb but I couldn’t see it in their store. I just grabbed 24tb x2 for SHR
@SpaceRex , what docking station model are you using with the macbook pro in this 10GbE setup?
+1 would love to know this too! Awesome content as always Spacerex
One thing's for certain- Synology would never "verify" it. I love their NAS, but hate their approach to not verifying drives made by any manufacturer other than themselves- ridiculous!
I would still have chosen SHR-1 if you plan to add a extension box, you will need to create another storage pool if you use RAID 5 instead of SHR-1
A month ago I put together an 1823xs+, with all eight drives at 24TB. (RAID 6, with a hot spare, totaling the maximum capability before I needed more RAM). 10Gb Ethernet and it is quite fast.
How long do you think it will take to rebuild if I lost a drive? Are there any other pitfalls I should consider? This is my first NAS. Thanks in advance, great videos.
I am switching to Exos due to the significant price differential. Further, Exos are rated at higher MTBF and workload in general, so a double win. I recently purchased a 20Tb Exos for almost £100 less than the Ironwolf Pro equivalent. In testing, it's no noisier than my 8Tb Ironwolf. So, why pay more for less?
I bought 4 off Exos X24 20TB, all four where dead on arrival one was beeping others were clicking badly, they wouldn't initialise in DS1821+ or PC, just waiting for my full refund. Was thinking of trying the iron wolf Pro next or Seagate Evo SSD 4TB
@@christopheroliver6747 Don't be put off. I've seen many such stories and reviews of drives being DOA. You have to remember that DOA drives are that way due to the handling they receive during shipping. To have that many drives DOA is most definitely an indicator of bad shipping. My Exos arrived in very thick bubble wrap. I spent 26 hours running an extended SMART scan on it before use and all was 100%.
If you order an Ironwolf from the same suppliers using the same couriers as the Exos's, you may also find DOA drives. I had a newly installed WD Red scanned some years back and it had over 200 bad blocks. The person in the Post Office dropped the box (not bubble wrapped) which accounted for this.
Further, be very careful using SSD's. I've spent months of time and hundred of Pounds trying to get a pair of Crucial MX500's to work in an DS223. All was well for months. However, rebooting it saw the volumes go critical and fail. The issue seems to be that the drive model couldn't be found during boot. I had to use an Synology HAT3300 HDD, which works fine.
@@christopheroliver6747that doesn't mean anything. Maybe somebody just knocked the box with the drives in transit...
@BoraHorzaGobuchul I bought 4off 22TB iron wolf Pro, I went in person to collect them from Scan shop, going to fit them later to DS1821+
Will these drives trigger "Not Supported" drive by Synology?
Just once
If you have xs+ it will trigger it, if you have consumer nas like 1821+ it will not trigger it
Only a warning but you click past it. I have 1019, 1520, 1522, and 1618 and no issues with compatibility errors. Only warning once.
Even if we optimistically assume that a RAID5/6 rebuild goes at the full 285 MB/s sequential speed, that would still take about 24 hours with one of these 24 TB drives
Question - how long did it take for the drives to be added in the storage pool? I have x4, 22TB Iron Wolf Pro's and just adding 1 of them took like 5 days I believe.
What would you recommend if you didn’t use Synology? I use truenas scale and it’s alright but I started with a 2 disk Mirror and you can’t just add more capacity. Pain.
What would you recommend for scalable Home build? I’m considering UNRAID .
i can buy 16 tb Exos X18 drives refurbished and factory sealed for 170 bucks. so no 24tb isnt an option yet, at least where i live.
The WD Red Pro 24TB has been out since April.
the seagate iron wolf since jan...
As long as its not Shingled magnetic recording (SMR)
Would these drives work in a DS923+ NAS? I have Seagate Exos X20 20TB drives in it now. Normally I have used WD Red Pro drives but the WD Red Pro 20TB drives would not initialize in my DS923+ NAS.
Thinking about buying a new NAS soon, having a DS918 now, but I am planning to buy smaller disks, since when I need more storage, I guess it will be a couple of years from now, then I can buy new ones, instead of mixing a couple of years old drives with new ones. Isn’t that resonable to think that way?
I generally would leave some drive bays empty, is way cheaper to just buy an extra drive, then to replace all of your drives, especially if you dont end up needing it
Amerikan istihbaratı Western Digital, Seagate gibi veri depolama firmalarını da kontrol et.
Pretty sure I need 5 of these.
Ok, 5 is not an issue. I am using a 1821+ .... But thinking of bigger systems: How many HDD should be in a RAID5/SHR1 at max? (HDD's per Pool; Probability of failure) Do you have a recommendation?
I normally do my 6/7th drive as RAID6 depending on the needs
All we need now is inexpensive ways to back up that much data.
600€+! when I can get a 18 for 320 tops! Do I want them? Hell, yeah! But, really worth it at the moment? Err, I'll give it a year.
For NAS setup, even if the Seagate drives are 50% cheaper, I will not consider them.
Reliability of the data outstrip the cost of cheap $/gb ones.
i can't imagine how long rebuilding a 100tb raid storage from 1 drive failure.
A lot of the documentation on these show max drive sizes of 12TB, 14TB etc. I thought this was a limitation. Is it actually just a recommendation?
Would a DS1520+ throw up endless compatibility warnings?
They do not! Just a single box that you check when you build the pool, after that it will show all green
That's always something I wrestle with after running updates. I have the 18TB WDs in a pair of RS2821RP+ rack units as well as a pair of DS1821+ boxes. After updating, I have to telnet into the rack units and turn off the compatibility warnings while no warnings pop up on the DS units.
@@SpaceRexWill Hi SpaceRex : can you please do a video on how to install a parental controls package on the SYNOLOGY NAS that would apply PARENTAL CONTROLS to the whole LAN network -- that would be wonderful please?
@@SD-SD-SDsomething tells me it's more of a router's job
expansion unit via single eSata connection if i remember well? pretty bad no?
So its slow if you put in SSD's, but for hard drives you probably will not notice
As well as having a ups ( same ups should be feeding both) make sure that you disable the per drive write cache on all drives (when using dx expander) this will slightly reduce the risk of total Pool destruction if the power or eSATA is lost to the dx expander
Are they on the compatability list for synology for a 1621+
No
Pretty much nothing new is on that list
20TB WD Easy store for $250 this week is worth it.
Good video, thanks. Can the 24TB drives be used in any Synology NAS? I'm running a DS1019+, DSM 6.2, single volume, SHR-2, BTRFS using five 10TB drives. I'm out of room, 80% utilization. This is my onsite backup NAS backing up a DS1520+ and four PCs. (I'm wishing that I had set it up with SHR rather than SHR-2.) Wanting to upgrade the HDDs in the DS1019+ I've searched the Synology website to find maximum drive size supported and I was unable to find a clear answer. Any info here would be appreciated.
I have 14TB drives in my 1019+ and 18TB drives in my 2419+'s i do not see a reason why 20 or 24TB drives would not be acceptable. But, your 1GB links will certainly bottleneck.. Not sure is there is a viable 2.5or 5GB usb nic option for that nas. Kudos for being smart and using SHR2, i truly disagree with raid 5 in most use cases, especially with the size of those drives and your considering 24TB drives, that is a great choice IMHO
I’m running 2 24tb as SHR in my 918+ now. All working fine
Wow. I haven’t seen a hard drive with moving parts in years.
Can you use them in the new Synology nas?
Which expansion unit do you recommend in 2024?
Each unit pretty much only has a single compatible expansion unit
@ do you know which one is compatible with ds923+ ?
Sad to see, how the industry is milking their audience with these drives, instead of releasing HAMR drives to the public… I’m not sure if they even going to do, or have market for those, when high density QLC SSDs are already on the corner
Not to speak ill of SpaceRex, he's doing what he has to make a few bucks.
But to make it worse, you've got RUclips influencers pumping these drives when there are much larger drive capacities out there between 26TB and 30 plus terabytes. They just seem difficult're to get.
@@Suzukii-Kryptoif you can't get it whats the point? We all know there are larger better things in the world but let's be real if you can get it, it doesn't exist.
I think HAMR drives are eventually going to actually make it on the market, but I have been reading articles for like 5 years that they are just around the corner. I know some 30TB drives have been shipped as samples, but I dont think they are on mass production yet
@ For me, it seems, they want to squeeze out as much margin as possible from these old drives to finance the RnD they spent on the HAMR technology. The only advantage of rust drives are their capacity, but we already see 64TB qlc ssds for at least a year now… In 7mm size as well…
I don't know if I would be happy with single drive redundancy in those capacities. Granted I have always insisted on two drive redundancy.
I guess in a home environment, it doesn't matter that much if you have a backup.
Can I add these drives to my DS920+?
Yup
650$ eatch in Sweden! Dont think so.😮
What's their dba of noise ?
Kingston firmasını da kontrol edin.
1 big transfer is not a stressful performance test, try a 100gb folder with 100k+ small and mixed files sizes to the nas.
That would be random read. The entire point was a sequential read to show top speed.
@ So it gives an over optimistic impression of performance, I’m not interested in that number myself,. I’d rather see results relating to copy large amounts of photo sized files.
@@debugin1227 No, it is not an optimistic impression of the performance. You just don’t understand the measurement. It’s like how a car company will list its car’s top speed, but not list every single speed limit the car can go at, because that would be dumb.
test with a load that pegs the I/O queue at 100%
@ pretty sure I understand the measurement…
i havew an issue with the 1522+ I have large files they wont copy to a picture machine but if I use a qnap same file copies just fine what's going on here why using same nas different hardware it copies fine but different nas it copies to that machine that has issues explain this in a video and how I fix this using x299 and ds1522+
we really need 28-32TB drives at 477.00 ea
Single redundancy 24tb drives seems a good idea
RAID isn’t a backup to begin with
@@SpaceRexWillThat argument works both ways. Backups don't save you from downtime. Those high capacity drives are risky and IMO warrant using raid 6.
@@neutralx2my backup is on a second nas (and elsewhere as well). In a home environment, a little downtime is not a big deal.
Not for Synology users (sad). 24TB seems like too much, if you have a 50% utilization rebuilding a single drive failure is going to take days. Outside highly redundant enterprise environments 20TB is already pushing it. With u.2 15TB ssd becoming mainstream (something you can buy in New Egg or B&H) we are just waiting for prices to go lower. Not a critique of the video, is excellent as always.
I would not worry about rebuild times. RAID is not a backup, and the likely hood of a dual drive failure is insanely rare.
I have never had a single client fair to rebuild their storage pool with RAID5. Not saying it does not happen, but its not something to worry about if you have a good backup
@@SpaceRexWill Hi SpaceRex : can you please do a video on how to install a parental controls package on the SYNOLOGY NAS that would apply PARENTAL CONTROLS to the whole LAN network -- that would be wonderful please?
Sandisk firmasını da kontrol edin.
NO ONE should run RAID 5 on a 100 TB volume. I’m not even sure I’d run RAID 6 on that without a hot spare.
Amerikan istihbaratı Henkel firmasını kontrol et. Türk istihbaratı sen de.
Türk istihbaratı sen de ülkedeki ofislerini ve depolarını.
Never again Seagate ;) WD only
100tb it nothing, 24tb, MEH.
Nice to see ticking the Checksum Box when creating the share folder (why Synology disables this basic functionality and advertised feature of the nas is unknown)
Never understood why they dont have that default checked!
Seagate drive 💀
😂
Why are you pushing synology on crap hardware. Ugreen with unraid makes synology look like 90s hardware.
He ain't. But many people still use Synology. It's somewhat crap but more or less reliable and has a certain reputation. Ugreen is new and their sw is somewhat half-baked, so if I'd take it out would be as a secondary only
1.RAID5? Don't think so. For greedy Gobsek as myself RAID is not an option. Every HDD have to be count, baby!. 2.650$-700$ a piece? You must be trippin. 3. For home users even most of 16TB HDDs on the market are on the verge of sound pollution they willing to cope with. But 24TB is a fckn orchestra.
If your nas is not under your bed but somewhere where it actually belongs, not really an issue. That is a limiting factor though for small apartments
These seem expensive at $27/TB (CDN) on sale.