# To NAS or not to NAS



## LarryEdwards (Apr 2, 2020)

Hi,
I know this question has been ask time and time again, but before I waste my money. Here I go again. I'm running windows 10, Three internal HD's with  one for Images storage. Two of the three are 1TB and one 250GB. I have a 4TB external for backup.  I want to put in a 4TB to backup my images to in a NAS system. This will just be a backup system only (I think).  Any ideas please.

Thanks


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Apr 2, 2020)

NAS are good as backup.

NAS are less good for production use (at least home NAS) but usable.

NAS are not allowed for catalogs (i.e. for production copy of the catalog).

How good depends on the NAS and the software involved.  Is there a specific aspect you are concerned about?

PS. Never use your backup NAS for your production work as well since that rather defeats the idea of a separate backup.


----------



## Conrad Chavez (Apr 2, 2020)

NAS means Network Attached Storage, so the first question for you is: Is there a requirement that this backup system has to be on the network?

If there is no actual need for it to be on a network, you should strongly consider DAS (Direct Attached Storage). All that means is to have a drive enclosure connected to your computer using USB 3 or Thunderbolt, instead of Ethernet networking.

Why is this important? Speed.

If you use an NAS, the top speed is limited by the type of networking you are using. If you will connect to the NAS using Gigabit Ethernet, it can’t go any faster than 1 Gb (gigabit) per second. But even that theoretical maximum is slower than most good hard drives. (Maybe not a big deal for backups, but Lightroom users typically need to move many GB (gigabytes) of photos and videos in a timely manner.) You could connect using 10 Gb/s Ethernet, but this is not common so it costs more, and if your computer’s Ethernet port and your router don’t already support 10 Gb/s they will all have to be upgraded.

A DAS connected using USB 3.1 (such as this model) is fast enough to not bottleneck any hard drive, and is also faster than cheaper SSDs. That's because USB 3.1 is either 5 Gb/s or 10 Gb/s depending on your computer — both many times faster than Gigabit Ethernet, but no extra cost because your computer already has what you need.

An NAS can be awesome if you need it to do other jobs for you. Do you need an NAS because it’s an always-on networked server that can back up multiple computers, serve music and movies to your TV and mobile devices, be a (non-backup) file server for documents the whole family or business needs to get to, record video from your surveillance cameras, function as a private cloud server when you’re mobile, etc? Then you want an NAS. But if all you need is an external USB enclosure with a 4TB drive inside purely for backups, then that’s all you need to pay for. That and reliable backup software.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Apr 2, 2020)

Well... if we are getting into the woods, and this applies to both USB and NAS drives... there is a strong argument made that they should not be connected (or more precisely mounted) all the time anyway if they are backups.

A backup is better offline except while being backed up.  The reason for this is simple: If you are attacked by Malware, and the backup is showing as a mounted drive, it will very likely encrypt your backup as well as your regular system.

I mention this because often NAS backups are done via dynamic connections (i.e. the backup software creates the connection on a temporary basis).  DAS is more frequently connected (drive mounted) all the time it is plugged in.  Now in both cases the opposite can occur, but that's the common case.  

So if using DAS for backup keep this in mind.

But while we are debating types -- I'm a huge and strong believer that production data (i.e. your master copies you may be editing and changing and moving) should be on local, internal storage.  On a technical front I think it's more reliable, but even if you think USB is just as reliable there's the human element -- cables and separate devices are exposed and "stuff happens".  They get unplugged, powered off, etc. by accident.  If that happens while in use there's a decent chance things get corrupted.

But yes I know -- a huge percentage of you like laptops not desktops, and external storage is the only option.  I get it.  And both USB and NAS connectivity can be really reliable if done well.  But... just saying... if you are one who likes reliability, get a big desktop and stuff it full of local storage (from reliable manufacturers).


----------



## Conrad Chavez (Apr 2, 2020)

Ferguson said:


> Well... if we are getting into the woods, and this applies to both USB and NAS drives... there is a strong argument made that they should not be connected (or more precisely mounted) all the time anyway if they are backups.


My photo backups follow that thinking. The production drives with all my photos and videos are in a DAS (multi-bay USB 3 enclosure). Each drive is backed up to an externally mounted drive of equal size that is connected only during backups. Because I don’t want the backups to be online all the time, exposed to power problems, OS crashes, malware/ransomware, etc. There are actually two sets of complete backup drives (one rotated off site), because as they say, just one backup is not really a backup.

That also brings up another wrinkle with NASs. NASs are generally designed to be easy to access from anywhere, inside or outside the home/office. This is one of their very great strengths. If the user uses good security practices and the software is robust, remote access is a great feature. But if an NAS is misconfigured or there is a security vulnerability in the NAS software, there is a chance that it could be accessed by a remote hack attack, with your backups on it. For reasons like that, If I did choose an NAS to back up my production drives, I would still maintain a complete additional set of offline backup drives with the same contents.


----------



## Gnits (Apr 3, 2020)

I have decided to use DAS for production and NAS for backup.  For me, NAS seemed attractive until I realised how slow the actual network throughput was. Too slow for me to use in practice. Too late to change my mind as I had purchased the NAS.  So I put hard drives into my workstation for Local speed and backed up locally and to the NAS. Worked for last 5 years or more.

Dealing with volume Sony a7r3 raw files , even larger PSD files  and the need to improve Lr responsiveness has forced me to reconsider my setup.

The availability of Thunderbolt 3 at 40gb/s has changed my mind.  I am currently installing a two bay Thunderbolt 3 DAS, with just 1 x 8TB disk. This is ample storage for my needs for the next year or two.  Also, best bang for buck, for me, right now.  When I need more storage, I can replace the 8TB drive or add another drive or both, depending of the price of storage at that point in time. I contine to back up to local and NAS drive.  ( Beware, no point in doing this if your port on your workstation does not support the latest Thunderbolt speed specs).

I have checked out NAS storage based on 10gb network. Firstly, 10gb NAS drives have a high cost of entry. Secondly, too expensive and labour intensive for me to upgrade Switches and related cabling. Thirdly... lots to go wrong with type of connectors, mix of fibre and copper connectors and cables. My view.... when 10 gb networks become normal for home / small office environments then consider a 10 gb NAS. Until then, you will be on the bleeding edge of network equipment selection, network cards, cable  connectors and cable configuration.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Apr 3, 2020)

Gnits said:


> I have checked out NAS storage based on 10gb network. Firstly, 10gb NAS drives have a high cost of entry. Secondly, too expensive and labour intensive for me to upgrade Switches and related cabling. Thirdly... lots to go wrong with type of connectors, mix of fibre and copper connectors and cables. My view.... when 10 gb networks become normal for home / small office environments then consider a 10 gb NAS. Until then, you will be on the bleeding edge of network equipment selection, network cards, cable  connectors and cable configuration.


Your conclusion makes good sense.  There are some alternatives, like skipping the switch and going direct with an additional (not replacement) NIC, but you have to get everything just right to really get 10gb to deliver 10gb for real, and even in the best implementation latency is much worse than DAS.

People often get really creative and introduce complexity that they themselves may not understand well to work around issues or save money.  It's always worth googling Rube Goldberg before crafting clever workarounds.


----------



## Gnits (Apr 3, 2020)

There are great contributions by all in this thread.  This is an area that will continue to evolve. 

I now have a 1 tb fibre internet connection  (for 35 euros per month ... who ever thought that would happen), piped to a router in the same cabinet as my managed switch,  which delivers POE to 24 wired ports around my apartment / home office.  I am a good candidate to consider a 10gb network.  But .... I have no idea if the cable buried in the walls is of a standard to support 10gb networking and do not want to spend weeks and months sourcing and configuring all the pieces. For many people, wireless now replaces the need for wired ports.

But... for some scenarios ... such as between a workstation and its disk storage ... you may want to try and match the speed your device can write or read to the speed the data can be sent down a wire to your workstation (bandwidth and latency).
It can be tempting to set up a high speed 10gb sub network connecting your storage to your workstation ... but beware ... your tidy desk becomes a mess of cables, switchs, power plugs etc.

The neatness of a Thunderbolt 3 small disk enclosure, with a single easy to use Thunderbolt cable, with an easy option to grow the size of the disks inside the enclosure  as your need grows , operating at a max of 40gb/s  ........... is very attractive (and no longer exorbitant pricewise).

If I was having a new workstation built, I would ensure that it has a 10gb network card installed (they are not expensive anymore). If you are buying a new laptop or workstation make sure you have a Thunderbolt 3 port that works at 40gb/s.  Then you are future proofing your investment.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Apr 3, 2020)

Most cable is labeled on the outside, and 6 or 6a is suitable and in the US often as cheap in bulk as 5, HOWEVER, you are right to worry, as putting cat 5 connectors on during construction is pretty common as they are cheaper.   But if you ever got into this situation, replacing wall jacks is actually really easy if there's enough cable slack, you just lay a wire over a color coded slot and push down with a provided plastic tool.  Now putting on connector ends is harder, and easy to mess up, and requires a much more expensive crimp tool.  

One thing worth noting that may not be obvious is if you care to invest in a 10g switch (with copper ports vs fiber) it will happily run at 1gbs on lower quality cable; one doesn't have to redo all the wiring to switch only select runs.  But adding POE to 10gbs can be a real challenge.  My recommendation to people using POE (which always, but not always, only is for devices needing 100mbs) is buy a small POE 1gbs or even 100mbs switch separately from a 10gbs switch, you'll find not trying to get both together opens up a lot more possibilities.

[For those following at home, POE switches are used to power VoIP telephones and video cameras mostly, the former never needs more than 100mbs, the latter depends on the camera but mostly does not.  POE can also sometimes power wifi access points though for home use that is more rare; those would need 1gbs usually.  POE is never needed to connect to your laptop or desktop.]

Incidentally - I have a lot of wireless, and have done serious wireless systems as a day job, but if I have the option I always run a wire -- they are faster, and virtually never break, have no relatively no interference, and are more secure.  But yes, my house is littered with wifi and zwave and proprietary wireless devices.  It's a losing battle.


----------



## clee01l (Apr 3, 2020)

I have not been a proponent of NAS. Mostly due to the single point of failure (Nas controller) and proprietary filesystem formats. However I have not seen any degradation in performance due to even 100 megabit Ethernet. My time capsule is such a NAS. And it operates on Wi-Fi that is about 300 Mb. Time machine has always managed to keep all of my back ups to that device without any delays or complaints


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## LarryEdwards (Apr 6, 2020)

Wow, a lot of great answers . I bought the Synology DS 218+. My plan is to just run it to back up my images. I have a ton of them.  It makes me feel a little safer. I still make another copy which I keep off site (yes I wear a belt and suspenders. One to keep it up and one to keep it closed)


----------



## Conrad Chavez (Apr 6, 2020)

Sounds like that will work out fine. I hear Synology is pretty reliable, and having the additional backup is very wise.

Although earlier I posted about limited network speeds, like Cletus said, network speed is perfectly OK if it's just for ongoing backups.


----------



## LarryEdwards (Apr 8, 2020)

Good morning Conrad,

Again thanks to everyone for all of the help.


----------



## BruceHatcher (Apr 14, 2020)

LarryEdwards said:


> Wow, a lot of great answers . I bought the Synology DS 218+. My plan is to just run it to back up my images. I have a ton of them.  It makes me feel a little safer. I still make another copy which I keep off site (yes I wear a belt and suspenders. One to keep it up and one to keep it closed)


Glad to hear your plan includes off-site backups - very important!!


----------

