Hacker News Reader

Comment by glogla | Hacker News Reader

NAS with SSD can go way faster than the ~ 120 MB/s 1GbE can offer. For NAS with HDD, the benefit is not as big but still there.

Also, the main competition is WiFi which is significantly slower than 1GbE in most cases.

View on HN

Spinning HDDs are faster than this as well, 250-300 MB/s sequential read seems common per drive, and in a home setup you might have a couple of those in a RAID-1 giving 500-600 MB/s read BW.

> couple of those in a RAID-1 giving 500-600 MB/s

If you are talking about only two drives than no. Multiple drives can give you more throughput, but at that point it is RAID-10.

Right, for 2x single stream sequential read throughput + redundancy I guess you need somehing like Linux f2 RAID10 mode. Otherwise reading every other stripe per disk would kill you due to seeks or 50% wasted readahead.

Well, seeing how large SSDs are still very expensive (in my mind it's €100 / TB), my hunch would be that if it makes sense for you to spend that much money on the drives, you probably won't really notice the price of a couple of 10 Gb network cards. They seem quite cheap on eBay if you're OK with used.

It is not the cards that are that expensive. It is also the switches etc.

Also SSD are not 100 EUR / TB. A 4 TB SSD is like 300 EUR.

The Mikrotiks are pretty reasonably priced (though you need adapters to go to RJ45, and you can only populate every other port due to heat). But you're right, the low end of switches are generally 10-20x more expensive IME.

Having a NAS is a niche thing.

People who notice mine in the corner mostly don't even know what it is.

NAS with HDD and a boat load of RAM can easily saturate 10GbE NIC if you're using it as a media server. Most content on my NAS is cached and rarely touches the disk.

I’m curious how your media content is being cached? Running a PLEX server very rarely would I get ZFS ARC hits even when a blockbuster came out.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com