10 PC Office Data Storage Recommendations
-
@MattSpeller said:
You can also setup plain old network shares and the permissions work just like the NTFS ones you're used to.
That's the answer to the question I having trouble writing!
-
@BRRABill said:
@MattSpeller said:
You can also setup plain old network shares and the permissions work just like the NTFS ones you're used to.
That's the answer to the question I having trouble writing!
I have already answered that
SMB Shares and NTFS ACLs. -
Too many answers, I was having trouble keeping up. If I could mark "ANSWER" on both posts I would.
This seems VERY intruging. VERY.
-
Using a NAS (which size is purely determined by storage capacity and performance, not features) locally or all hosted (cloud, as it is often called incorrectly) are the only two standard answers for an environment like this. Those two cover effectively all use cases.
-
@BRRABill said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Active Directory, email server, instant messaging, database, etc.
Right, yeah I don't think so, nope.
The NAS (like the Synology) can do users?
Some NAS devices can do 'users'... however you will be better suited to use a full server running AD...
-
@BRRABill we have 4 of the Synology ones if you have any questions or want screen shots etc. Perhaps in a new thread? Whatever works.
-
@gjacobse said:
Some NAS devices can do 'users'... however you will be better suited to use a full server running AD...
This is confusing. "All" do SMB shares and all of the associated permissions of them. Drobo is the least capable out there (B800fs, 5n) and it does this.
Nearly all except for Drobo do SMB and AD Integration.
All business class ones like Synology and ReadyNAS do SMB, AD and NTFS.
You can't have a NAS without users, but it is what OTHER non-user features that you want that changes the capabilities.
-
@MattSpeller said:
Synology DS412+ (cloudsync user's folders is niiiiiice)
Is there a particular reason you recommend that model? (Which has apparently been replaced by the DS415+.)
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@johnhooks said:
It will do Samba with users and permissions through its web gui.
Meaning SMB. Samba is the name of the underlying code but not relevant to the users of a NAS - that's just under the hood. It is an SMB server like Windows. It does the same SMB features that Windows would do.
The NAS user still has to be added to Samba to allow them access to the share.
-
It's likely the model he could buy at the time.
-
@BRRABill nope, I think we actually have 2x 415+ and 2x monster size one. Been a while since I shopped for them but I think they have a couple tiers. The ones we have are the fancy pants models.
-
@johnhooks said:
The NAS user still has to be added to Samba to allow them access to the share.
Same as you have to add them to the SMB Server on Windows. Given that the point of a NAS is to abstract to a higher level, thinking of it in terms of being Samba (which it does not necessarily have to be, it's just any SMB server, sometimes it is others) is confusing.
-
@MattSpeller said:
@BRRABill nope, I think we actually have 2x 415+ and 2x monster size one. Been a while since I shopped for them but I think they have a couple tiers. The ones we have are the fancy pants models.
I guess my real question is ... how do you pick from all the models? LOL.
I think @scottalanmiller said based on storage capacity performance.
I'm not even going to look at them. I'll talk to @Brett-at-ioSafe when he chmies in.
-
For this size environment I'd be really surprised if anything bigger than a DS215+ was needed. WD Red drives are probably enough. Red Pro if you need a speed boost. That's likely it.
-
@BRRABill said:
I think @scottalanmiller said based on storage capacity performance.
Yup, it's all down to capacity and IOPS. Nothing more. Not until you need to rack mount them.
-
@BRRABill we started with 1 DS415+ with 4x 1TB to backup video and we liked it enough to buy another identical one and two RS3614+ and scrapped storing user data on servers at all. Company size is 120-150, tech level is moderate to high.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@johnhooks said:
The NAS user still has to be added to Samba to allow them access to the share.
Same as you have to add them to the SMB Server on Windows. Given that the point of a NAS is to abstract to a higher level, thinking of it in terms of being Samba (which it does not necessarily have to be, it's just any SMB server, sometimes it is others) is confusing.
But you can have users on it that don't have access to any SMB shares, so those wouldn't be Samba users. Some can have access to only NFS shares or WebDAV.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
For this size environment I'd be really surprised if anything bigger than a DS215+ was needed. WD Red drives are probably enough. Red Pro if you need a speed boost. That's likely it.
We set up a DS414J and it worked fine for about 15 users, and with regular reds
-
@gjacobse said:
however you will be better suited to use a full server running AD...
This is just crazy. There is no AD in a business of this size. Why would you even think to introduce such complexity just for a simple share that a NAS can handle.
-
What makes a drive a "NAS drive"?
I was looking at the WD Reds that were mentioned.
Strangely enough after my OTHER issue with the drives, I was expecting to 2TB drives to be like $1,000 each. When I saw what the price was, I LOLed in my office.
