D-Link Forums
The Graveyard - Products No Longer Supported => D-Link Storage => DNS-323 => Topic started by: Cliff on July 08, 2010, 08:49:05 AM
-
I've been using the DSN-323 for a few years now. I originally picked it up thinking I could stop adding drives to my home PC's and just add to a central location. Now I realize the nas isn't quite fast enough when I'm trying to move multi-GB movies around.
I also wanted to backup the PC's. This is nothing short of impossible with the nas
I'd like a reliable music server. Yes, the DNS has one, but it is too slow for my large collection.
I would now like a media server so my WDTV Live box can access video across the LAN. It works, but the uPNP server on the DNS doesn't serve subtitles.
So, I'm now considering moving to a Windows Home Server solution instead. Everything I've read says it can do all this easily, plus the transfer performance is close to what you'd expect on a GB LAN.
Any thoughts from anyone, considerations or things I might have missed are welcome.
-
I'd consider a higher end NAS, the savings in power consumption will pay for it in sort order. Windows Home Server requires a full-up PC, but something like a Synology DS209 (which I have) will consume a fraction of the power and offer the performance and capability you desire.
-
So, I'm now considering moving to a Windows Home Server solution instead. Everything I've read says it can do all this easily, plus the transfer performance is close to what you'd expect on a GB LAN.
WHS transfer performance will actually depend on what hardware you're running WHS on - so don't let anybody tell you what to expect, unless you give them the hardware spec you plan to use, or they give you the hardware spec their performance numbers were achieved with.
I was a part of Microsoft's WHS public beta and the transfer numbers I saw with a Realtek gigabit NIC were mediocre beyond belief, even worse than my DNS-323, in fact, not even up to 100 mbps levels - I tracked the problem down to Microsoft's native Windows drivers for that particular NIC and was able to double the throughput by using the drives that shipped (on a diskette) with the NIC, but, at it's best, that box could not transfer data any faster than my DNS-323.
Yes - I was running the beta on older hardware that barely met the hardware requirements for WHS, and would no doubt have seen better performance had I used more capable hardware, but then that pushes the price up, and the power consumption up, and guess what - my DNS-323 does everything I need, include backup my PCs and without loading any software agents onto the PC as is required by WHS.
-
I have an Acer Revo ATOM 330 that gets around 60MB/sec. To give you a quick comparison, moving 60GB from the DNS-323 takes a little over an hour. Same transfer takes about 7 1/2 minutes with the ATOM. This is while the media server is running.
Couldn't I expect similar performance with WHS?
-
something like a Synology DS209 (which I have) will consume a fraction of the power and offer the performance and capability you desire.
Thanks GunnerJohn. I did a bit of poking around, and the biggest difference between the 209 and the 209+ seems to be the inclusion of an eSATA port, and a whack of dough.
How does the DS210J compare to the 209? The 210J is considerably less expensive.
-
After looking at the amazing gallery of products for the Synology I think the DLink folks need to see what their competition is doing.
http://www.synology.com/us/products/features/index.php (http://www.synology.com/us/products/features/index.php)
-
The DS210J is a lower end model. Here's a comparison of various models: http://www.synology.com/enu/products/2bay_perf.php (http://www.synology.com/enu/products/2bay_perf.php)
-
Thanks!
So it looks like I'm deciding between:
http://www.bjorn3d.com/read.php?cID=1583&pageID=6974 (http://www.bjorn3d.com/read.php?cID=1583&pageID=6974)
and
http://www.digitaltrends.com/hard-drive-reviews/acer-aspire-easystore-h340-review/ (http://www.digitaltrends.com/hard-drive-reviews/acer-aspire-easystore-h340-review/)
-
Well, based on the reviews I read, I think I'd stick with the Synology. :D
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductReview.aspx?Item=N82E16859321013 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductReview.aspx?Item=N82E16859321013)
-
I hear you - this is NOT an easy decision. Just curious, is your setup mostly windows PC's with typical family stuff like photos, music and movies?
-
Yep, I have two 1.5TB drives in a RAID-1 setup. FWIW, the Acer doesn't offer RAID, which I find a bit surprising. It's also Windows Home Server based and a little rough around the edges from what I read.
-
hey cliff, another brand to look at is QNAP, i had a 323 for my first NAS and then due to speed and other issues i looked at other brands ... i ended up buying a QNAP 219P and it was around $300 and then i just purchased the QNAP 459-Pro because they are so good and fast and have a huge amount of features ... so just to give you another option to the brand mix and make the decision more complicated ...
-
Damn! You're right. Actually, I just recommended a QNAP for a client but for some reason figured the QNap was beyond the budget of a home setup.
Problem is the QNap Pro compares at $957.00 compared to mid $300 for Acer or Synlogic.
-
hey cliff, the 459 pro is around the 957 mark, but the 219p is no where near that i think i paid around $300 Canadian ... i had a toss up between the synlogic and qnap and decided on qnap and have been very happy ... gunrunnerjohn decided on the synlogic and loves his so they are both good and for a little more much better then the 323 as has been explained but the ultimate decision is up to you ...
the one big thing that made me change brands was the firmware update frequency, i know when i bought it what it was capable of and was happy but it is always nice when a company will stand behind there product and make it better if they can which both of the other companies do on a regular basis. 1 firmware update a year that doesn't address old issues isn't enough for me ...
-
GunnerJohn and yourself have convinced me to stay with the NAS solution and bypass the WHS for now.
Looks like I'm now down to a QNAP 219P ($372.00) vs the Synology 209 ($340.00). Could also consider the QNAP 210 for $311.00. I have a buddy that would like me to install a NAS in his small office for automated backups, and I figured I'd get him the same box as myself.
Does either the synology or the QNAP offer a synchronization feature? I have multiple PC's in my home, and I'd like additions, modifications and deletions to be propagated to the other PC's.
From what I've read the 219P probably compares more to the 209+ on the performance side, so it should perform significantly better than the 209. The 219P also has 2 eSata ports.
From the comparison here: http://www.tomsguide.com/us/NAS-LaCie-Synology,review-1429-4.html (http://www.tomsguide.com/us/NAS-LaCie-Synology,review-1429-4.html)
I think I'm leaning towards the QNap 219P
-
hey cliff,
i use my 219P as a backup nas, i don't do sync and don't think it does but it does backups and will do incremental and delete files on the backup that aren't on the source anymore. you could verify this by asking the question in the QNAP forums in the presales section, one of the experts there would know ...
i can't remember why i went with QNAP over synology but i did and am very happy with my decision .. obviously GRJ is happy with his synology ... i think the main thing is is the dlink will not work for you and i was in the same boat as you but didn't do my research right and bought the dlink first ...
-
Actually, in that comparison you reference, the Synology was significantly faster in the all important network access to it's internal drives. What in this comparison made you think the QNAP was the better choice?
(http://media.bestofmicro.com/Qnap-TS-219P-NAS,I-M-230062-13.jpg)
(http://media.bestofmicro.com/Qnap-TS-219P-NAS,I-N-230063-13.jpg)
-
I have the DNS-323 and the Acer Easy Share with WHS. Both are very capable with lots of support for plugins.
I use the Acer for streaming movies and daily backups. The box is very fast compared to the DNS.
The DNS I use for monthly backups and power-down the drives when not in use.
I don't use RAID, so WHS is very nice for its JBOD setup and its software based duplication technology.
I bough the Acer after looking for a 4 bay box, the DNS-343 was more expensive and the other brands like QNAP and synology where much much expensive compared to the Acer.
-
Anyone test the speeds of the 323 vs. the QNAP or Synology? I saw the above graphs and am hoping to see how the 323 stacks up. I have the 323 with 2 WD 2 tb green drives. Is it worth an upgrade to the QNAP or Synology? THanks.
-
I have the DNS-323 and the Synology DS209. The Synology blows the D-Link away as far as speeds and functionality. Of course, it's also twice the price, but sometimes you do get what you pay for. :)
-
Did I msread the data on performance? Possible.
I really do appreciate all the great guidance and advice. If I may push your generosity a bit....
Does the Synology have a built in backup app? What I'm hoping to setup is either a PC NAS based incremental pull backup, or alternatively the Synology comes with piece of software that will run incremental backups on the PC's.
Synchronization would be nice, but isn't necessary.
-
There are a variety of backup methods available for the Synology. It has the capability to run it's internal backup and backup the NAS to an attached USB drive or drives.
For backups from PC's, I run a scheduled backup task on the PC using Beyond Compare. Since the machine has to be on anyway, I find this to be the easy way.
Synology is going to release a vastly upgraded backup packages for their units this fall, but I don't know what it's capabilities will be. If you have an rsync capable target, the Synology can backup to that device.
-
hey goven, like GRJ said about the speeds, i have the QNAP 219P and 459 Pro and the speeds blow the 323 away but so they should as they have more memory and a faster processor and are also more money ....
hey cliff ... the QNAP has a built-in backup that uses rsync and will do incremental backups, you can backup to a usb or drive as well and you can also install a lot of different backup softwares like symantec backup exec, etc so you would be able to get what you are looking for out of the QNAP ... i am sure GRJ will also say you can get the same out of the Synology as they are in the same league with features, price, etc
-
Thanks Klein. I should have clarified for the price of the NAS, I'm looking for a backup solution that is included and not an additional price.
I assume with the QNAP rsync runs on the PC?
-
rsync runs on both ends to do a backup.
-
Thanks again GRJ.
Damn, this is NOT an easy decision. Maybe I'll have to see which one is easily available locally to help me decide.
-
I don't think you'll go wrong with either the Synology or QNAP products, you just have to look carefully at the models and determine which ones offer the features you want.
-
Would it fair to say the Synology 209 performs better with a more user friendly interface and the QNAP's advantage is an eSata port?
-
Many Synology models come with an eSATA port, it so happens that the DS-209 did not have it.
-
True. I'm just trying to compare two models that are similar in price.
-
hey cliff, i agree, it is a tough decision and we are both saying all the good things about each unit ..
you mention synology having a more user friendly interface, as i don't own one i can't comment but i do know the QNAP has a very easy user interface from my own experience ... it does have the esata port but like GRJ said most of them do so it all depends on your needs and features you want .. once you get one you will love whatever you get as they are both great units ...
-
All things being equal between the two discussed, I'd go for the speed unless the eSATA port is a big deal. :D
-
i would normally agree to go with speed but it isn't a huge difference so in this case i would go for esata in case you want to backup to a disk, it is much faster then usb and you have it available, you can't add an esata port to the NAS ... speed is also going to be dependent on your network, you might not even notice the difference ... so something else to consider ...
aren't you glad we are making your decision easier :)
-
Since my backups to USB drives are totally unattended, and they proceed at around 25mbytes/sec, I don't really miss the eSATA port. I have two USB drives sitting beside the Synology that run scheduled backups several times a week of the contents of the NAS.
-
hey cliff,
here are the links and you can compare them:
Synology:
http://www.synology.com/us/products/compare_spec.php
QNAP:
http://www.qnap.com/images/products/comparison/Comparison_NAS.html
i noticed a few differences, the QNAP has 512 ram vs Synology 256, the QNAP has hot swappable drives, the power consumption is better on the QNAP, QNAP can do EXT3 and EXT4 if you want ...
i have heard the photostation on the Synology is better but QNAP just released a new firmware that includes one like Synology's so they are getting there, just a few bugs in it so should be fixed next firmware release but then again you aren't looking for that feature ..
i will let you find anymore if you want to ...
-
Thanks Klein for those pages, great comparison of models.
The QNAP uses NetBak for workstation backup
http://www.qnap.com/pro_detail_feature.asp?p_id=122 (http://www.qnap.com/pro_detail_feature.asp?p_id=122), the Synology uses Data Replicator http://download.synology.com/download/ds/DS209/DataSheet/Synology%20DS209%20Data%20Sheet_enu.pdf (http://download.synology.com/download/ds/DS209/DataSheet/Synology%20DS209%20Data%20Sheet_enu.pdf). Can I assume that both work equally well?
I now plan to introduce a remote NAS as well, so the backup strategy should include a remote NAS in the picture.
I know this is a dumb question, but I've been burned too many times by products promising they can do something but coming up short.