Synology NAS desktop/software question

Discussion in 'Mac Accessories' started by Happymistakes, Jan 28, 2014.

  1. Happymistakes macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    #1
    I'm thinking of buying a Synology NAS. I'm a photographer and all my (huge) RAW files are on three external HD's. I'm running out of space and want the security of extra back-ups.

    Anyway. I'm used to having to be able to see those HD's on my desktop and ad/delete and work from them. Will that be as easy and straightforward with the NAS? Or do I have to use their software to acces my stuff?

    Thanks!
     
  2. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #2
    Yes, once you access the shared drive in the Finder it will basically behave like any other disk, other then moving the files to trash. They're deleted immediately, not sitting in the trash bin. The synology may offer a trash bin for deleted files (my Qnap NAS does) but I'm not entirely sure.

    Instead of a NAS, have you thought about a DAS, it offers similar features (such as RAID data redundancy) but its superior in that it connects via USB or Thunderbolt (depending on what you buy) where as the NAS is ethernet/wifi. Of course if you have multiple computers the NAS makes more sense.
     
  3. Happymistakes thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    #3
    Thanks!!! Yes We have multiple computers so NAS would be the better option I guess.

    I've narrowed it down to the Synology DS412+ with two 4TB WD hard disks to begin with. Still debating wether to go with the black or green. I'm not sure how much I will notice the speed difference. Any thoughts?
     
  4. blueroom macrumors 603

    blueroom

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    #4
    Good NAS choice, go with the NAS drives not the desktop drives.

    PS what's your current backup strategy? The Synology can do timed backup to external storage.
     
  5. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #5
    Ok, then yeah a NAS makes more sense :) As with what Peabody mentioned you need a good backup strategy for the NAS. As I'm sure you know, RAID is data redundancy not a backup solution.
     
  6. Happymistakes thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    #6
    Thanks. Yes, I know. I'll use Time machine to do actual backups of my system and I just want the NAS to mirror (if I'm calling this correctly) all the RAW and edited files (and probably some extra stuff) on the HD's.

    I've read somewhere there is also a dongle if I want to acces the NAS with my MBP via WIFI. Anyone farmiliar with those?
     
  7. HazzaB macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Location:
    UK
    #7
    I've got the DS214. The Synology operating system is really easy to use, and pretty much makes the device. One piece of advice though, go for WD Red drives, they are designed and optimised for NAS use. I've got a couple in mine, and they run like a dream.
     
  8. Happymistakes thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    #8
    Ok, figured out that the DS414 is actually newer (thinking about compatibility support with the OS) and less expensive. Fewer options but none I really can't do without I think (I'm only will be using this for me and my partner).

    If I want WD harddrives of 4 TB each, Synology gives me two options:
    WD40EFRX or WD4000F9YZ. Any thoughts? Thanks again.
     
  9. monsieurpaul macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    #9
    You can install whatever hard drive you want in your Synology. Western Digital has lines of HD specifically for NAS: WD Red, Re, Se. The Red ones seems to have the best cost/effectivness ratio. Another good read about HD.
    You need to plug your NAS on ethernet (to your router generally) but I think the DS213air can do WiFi directly.
    If you want to synchronize files between your computers and the NAS, you should try BitTorrent Sync which has a client for the Synology and works very well.
     
  10. djarum69 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2007
    #10
    If you already have a WiFi router on your network you don't need the WiFi dongle.
     
  11. glenthompson macrumors 68000

    glenthompson

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Location:
    Virginia
    #11
    Since the NAS doesn't need to be near your computers it's better to connect it via gig Ethernet to your router. Gets much faster and more consistent speeds. My preference is to connect anything in a fixed location via cable instead of wireless.
     
  12. Happymistakes thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    #12
    Thanks, I don't have wires through my house so the NAS sits under my desk and is not connected to the internet.
     
  13. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #13
    Naming convention for Synology
    DS = Disk Station
    4 = number of bays
    14 = Model year.
    + (if present faster model)
    J (if present inexpensive model)

    So yeah the DS414 will be newer then the DS412+ :)
     
  14. NukeIT macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2013
    #14
    Why not just connect it to your home router?? Then any computer on the network can access it. No need to have wires running all over.

    I store all my media, including my raw digitals, works like a dream.

    I have a DS1513+, RAID 5 and run crashplan headless on it to backup to the cloud.
     
  15. Happymistakes thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    #15

    That wasn't the issue here, so I'm not getting into that. :D
     
  16. monsieurpaul macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    #16
    But your NAS HAVE to be connected to your network (unless your talking about a DAS).
     
  17. DFWHD macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2011
    #17
    I've got a DS1511+ and was wondering what type of read/write speeds you are getting for your media?
     
  18. NukeIT macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2013
    #18
    I am wifi limited, so only see around 34 MB/sec (using BlackMagic app)
     
  19. hfg macrumors 68040

    hfg

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2006
    Location:
    Cedar Rapids, IA. USA
    #19
    DiskTest with my DS1512+ Hybrid RAID SHR (single LAN hookup):

    5 ea. 3TB WD RED drives (about 1/2 full)

    .
     

    Attached Files:

  20. DFWHD macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2011
    #20
    Thanks for posting. I'm seeing similar. I feel better about my setup now!
     
  21. hfg macrumors 68040

    hfg

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2006
    Location:
    Cedar Rapids, IA. USA
    #21
    That's good to know for me as well ... I haven't seen many postings regarding data transfer speeds to a NAS, so I don't know if my readings are bad or good. :)

    I do know I probably should reduce the number of LAN switches between my Mac Pro and the Synology NAS box in the basement for a more direct connection (or possibly even ethernet aggregation with 2 lines and a better switch/router). :D


    -howard
     
  22. DFWHD macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2011
    #22
    My old setup maxed out at 10 mbps on the synology NAS using cat5 that was prewired in the house when we moved in. The NAS was in the closet and the iMac in the study. The cat5 also carried phone signals. I decided to move the NAS to a separate lan recently and added a new gigabit switch off that mainline and a new gigabit router complete with cat6 cables from the switch to the router to the NAS and iMac. I also moved the NAS to the study. Speeds went from 10 mbps to the average of 100 to 105 mbps that I'm seeing now. A huge increase in performance for me to get to this point.

    I also thought about adding a switch that offers link aggregation. I looked at the Netgear Prosafe GS108Tv2 that offers aggregation. Some folks use it on the MR forums. It runs about $80 at Amazon, but I decided that the hassle of configuring it might not be worth the additional r/w speed bump.
     

Share This Page