locked
WHS vs QNAP TS-209 RRS feed

  • Question

  • I'm trying to decide between building a WHS box or going with the QNAP TS-209 .

    Why do I want either?
    1. RAID 1 secure shared storage of pictures/video/music.
    2. RAID 1 secure backup
    3. DLNA server to play content through my PS3
    4. Other features like web server, remote access, unattended downloads, etc are nice but now required.
    What sort of WHS box would I build?
    1. 1GHZ fanless Via C7 CPU for low power and low noise (one of SN/EN/LN)
    2. 2 x 500GB 3.5" 7200rpm 16MB SATAII drives (one of the energy efficient models available)
    3. 1GB DDR2 533MHz SDRAM
    4. Compact case: have been salivating over the Chenbro ES34069
    I'm only interested in RAID 1 for basic data security (there is a QNAP TS-409 for those who want 4 drives and RAID 5).

    What I like about WHS software:
    1. cluster level single-instance store backups very efficient
    What I like about DIY WHS hardware:
    1. If I go with SN10000EG and 4-drive case I have an upgrade path to RAID 5 (not sure how easy to move the files though)
    What I like about QNAP TS-209
    1. Price looks pretty competetive: $360 + $200 for drives
    2. Supports cluster-level single-instance store backups
    3. Smart power management (it goes to sleep)
    4. Doesn't tie me to Windows (although that's the only thing I presently use anyway)
    5. Includes niceties like real WebServer (PHP/MySQL), iTunes server, FTP/SSH access, hackability due to Linux platform
    What I'm worried about on QNAP TS-209
    1. Linux based so native file system is not NTFS.  Does this mean that performance of backups and shared storage will suffer?
    I will mostly access my files through 802.11g (eventually 802.11n) so maybe this is a moot point as they will throttle everything anyway?

    Your thoughts pro and con are appreciated.
    Friday, February 15, 2008 9:57 PM

Answers

  • To put that into perspective, I'm running two WHS units since beta, and have built over 20 others for customers. NOT ONE has suffered from any data loss. There were a very small number of people who did suffer from that data loss and the current beta of the Power Pack fixes that and other issues.

    Also note that a Raid 1 setup doesn't give you any data security at all. The only thing it provides, is continuity of use. Any data loss, like deleting a file inadvertently, is deleted from both drives at the same time.

    Don't forget also, that the SMB that just about all these NAS's use, (and I use them extensively myself), isn't a standard as Microsoft only ever designed this for internal use. There have been reports where restores from a NAS has failed because of unknown problems which relate to their own interpretation to the SMB protocol.

     

    However, after saying that, it really depends on what you want to use it for and does the extra power draw of WHS compared to a NAS justify it's flexability.

     

    Colin

     

    Tuesday, July 15, 2008 6:19 PM

All replies


  • You should check out the review and performance charts over at smallnetbuilder.

    http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com_nas/Itemid,190/chart,18/


    WHS using one drive will trounce almost all performance numbers for most NAS drives in terms of performance.  Using two or more drives you'll get comparable performance with a dedicated NAS drive.

    In terms of support, hopefully WHS will be around for the next few years and Microsoft will continue to offer patches and upgrades to it.  A dedicated device will suffer when the company releases the new version of the hardware.  Firmware updates will become far and few between.

    WHS lets you upgrade all aspects of your hardware, a dedicated NAS will only allow you to upgrade the drives easily.

    My home network journey started with the dlink dns-323 and has progressed to me using WHS.  I would guess that's going to be the same for anyone that searches for increased performance and features.


    Friday, February 15, 2008 10:14 PM
  • QNAP's box is sexy with good sepc.

    Power-saving is another advantage of Linux embedded system-based compare with the X86 ones. 

    There is a active QNAP forum with continuous support.

    The built-in Twonkymedia UPnP/DLNA server is also good as a home streaming server.

     

    Saturday, February 16, 2008 1:02 AM
  • Don't bother with WHS just yet.

    I used it for a while and found that it to be buggy, losing all data on more than one occasion. This is the last thing you want for your important data.

    Go with a tried and tested Linux box that just works rather than new software that has only just come out of beta.

     

    Tuesday, July 15, 2008 12:20 PM
  • To put that into perspective, I'm running two WHS units since beta, and have built over 20 others for customers. NOT ONE has suffered from any data loss. There were a very small number of people who did suffer from that data loss and the current beta of the Power Pack fixes that and other issues.

    Also note that a Raid 1 setup doesn't give you any data security at all. The only thing it provides, is continuity of use. Any data loss, like deleting a file inadvertently, is deleted from both drives at the same time.

    Don't forget also, that the SMB that just about all these NAS's use, (and I use them extensively myself), isn't a standard as Microsoft only ever designed this for internal use. There have been reports where restores from a NAS has failed because of unknown problems which relate to their own interpretation to the SMB protocol.

     

    However, after saying that, it really depends on what you want to use it for and does the extra power draw of WHS compared to a NAS justify it's flexability.

     

    Colin

     

    Tuesday, July 15, 2008 6:19 PM