Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

NAS Buyer - Small Business, Remote Server

Tags:
  • NAS Storage
  • VPN Tunnel
  • Business Computing
  • Servers
  • NAS / RAID
  • VPN
Last response: in Business Computing
Share
October 7, 2014 1:51:26 PM

I am currently a new sys admin for a small business. We are currently set up with a remote server which provides file storage and DNS services for the workstations on the network through a vpn. While we really like the setup, the response time for downloading and uploading documents to this server is unbearable.

I'd like to build/buy a NAS unit which will operate locally and provide more speedy access to documents and files on the network while checking the file system and making sure that any changes are reflected on the server proper.

I have two questions:

What is the best software solution for this kind of setup? Is this even a viable solution to our problem or am I barking up the wrong tree?

Also, should I be looking at buying a simple, cheap NAS unit or would a more powerful option be a better fit? I don't mind spending the resources on building a dedicated machine for NAS tasks rather than buying one with an underpowered SOC, i just don't want to waste money if it really isn't necessary.

More about : nas buyer small business remote server

October 7, 2014 4:04:46 PM

You should buy a NAS which will join to your Windows domain (assuming you have one). One of the Synology plus models (DS214+, or DS415+) or a Qnap TS-x53 or TS-x53 Pro (the "x" is 2 for a 2 disk unit, etc). These have software to join your domain and use the domain poilicies and logins for access.
m
0
l
October 8, 2014 2:07:00 PM

kanewolf said:
You should buy a NAS which will join to your Windows domain (assuming you have one). One of the Synology plus models (DS214+, or DS415+) or a Qnap TS-x53 or TS-x53 Pro (the "x" is 2 for a 2 disk unit, etc). These have software to join your domain and use the domain poilicies and logins for access.


Is there any reason to go with a more powerful NAS? EG, should I think about building a workstation that will serve those functions with a faster processor? FIle access time and consistency with the remote file system are our priorities.
m
0
l
Related resources
October 8, 2014 4:48:49 PM

Oliver Gappmayer said:
kanewolf said:
You should buy a NAS which will join to your Windows domain (assuming you have one). One of the Synology plus models (DS214+, or DS415+) or a Qnap TS-x53 or TS-x53 Pro (the "x" is 2 for a 2 disk unit, etc). These have software to join your domain and use the domain poilicies and logins for access.


Is there any reason to go with a more powerful NAS? EG, should I think about building a workstation that will serve those functions with a faster processor? FIle access time and consistency with the remote file system are our priorities.


File serving takes very little CPU. The higher end commercial NAS units only have celeron CPUs. More CPU won't improve your throughput.

Your last statement makes me wonder if a NAS is really what you want. It sounds like you are looking for a file caching device with the "gold" copy stored remotely. A NAS could do backups to the remote location, but "consistency" sounds like you are looking for a more real-time synchronization.
m
0
l
October 9, 2014 10:25:29 AM

kanewolf said:
Oliver Gappmayer said:
kanewolf said:
You should buy a NAS which will join to your Windows domain (assuming you have one). One of the Synology plus models (DS214+, or DS415+) or a Qnap TS-x53 or TS-x53 Pro (the "x" is 2 for a 2 disk unit, etc). These have software to join your domain and use the domain poilicies and logins for access.


Is there any reason to go with a more powerful NAS? EG, should I think about building a workstation that will serve those functions with a faster processor? FIle access time and consistency with the remote file system are our priorities.


File serving takes very little CPU. The higher end commercial NAS units only have celeron CPUs. More CPU won't improve your throughput.

Your last statement makes me wonder if a NAS is really what you want. It sounds like you are looking for a file caching device with the "gold" copy stored remotely. A NAS could do backups to the remote location, but "consistency" sounds like you are looking for a more real-time synchronization.


I'm not familiar with these types of devices. What is different between this and a NAS setup? Who manufactures a cache device I should look at?
m
0
l
October 9, 2014 11:35:49 AM

Oliver Gappmayer said:
kanewolf said:
Oliver Gappmayer said:
kanewolf said:
You should buy a NAS which will join to your Windows domain (assuming you have one). One of the Synology plus models (DS214+, or DS415+) or a Qnap TS-x53 or TS-x53 Pro (the "x" is 2 for a 2 disk unit, etc). These have software to join your domain and use the domain poilicies and logins for access.


Is there any reason to go with a more powerful NAS? EG, should I think about building a workstation that will serve those functions with a faster processor? FIle access time and consistency with the remote file system are our priorities.


File serving takes very little CPU. The higher end commercial NAS units only have celeron CPUs. More CPU won't improve your throughput.

Your last statement makes me wonder if a NAS is really what you want. It sounds like you are looking for a file caching device with the "gold" copy stored remotely. A NAS could do backups to the remote location, but "consistency" sounds like you are looking for a more real-time synchronization.


I'm not familiar with these types of devices. What is different between this and a NAS setup? Who manufactures a cache device I should look at?


I don't know if there IS such a device, especially without a 6 digit price tag. I was trying to understand your "consistency" statement, and hoping you would discuss your requirements/desires. I was just trying to point out that "consistency" with real-time sync isn't a feature of small office type NAS units. Does this clarify my comments?
m
0
l
October 13, 2014 12:28:12 PM

kanewolf said:
Oliver Gappmayer said:
kanewolf said:
Oliver Gappmayer said:
kanewolf said:
You should buy a NAS which will join to your Windows domain (assuming you have one). One of the Synology plus models (DS214+, or DS415+) or a Qnap TS-x53 or TS-x53 Pro (the "x" is 2 for a 2 disk unit, etc). These have software to join your domain and use the domain poilicies and logins for access.


Is there any reason to go with a more powerful NAS? EG, should I think about building a workstation that will serve those functions with a faster processor? FIle access time and consistency with the remote file system are our priorities.


File serving takes very little CPU. The higher end commercial NAS units only have celeron CPUs. More CPU won't improve your throughput.

Your last statement makes me wonder if a NAS is really what you want. It sounds like you are looking for a file caching device with the "gold" copy stored remotely. A NAS could do backups to the remote location, but "consistency" sounds like you are looking for a more real-time synchronization.


I'm not familiar with these types of devices. What is different between this and a NAS setup? Who manufactures a cache device I should look at?


I don't know if there IS such a device, especially without a 6 digit price tag. I was trying to understand your "consistency" statement, and hoping you would discuss your requirements/desires. I was just trying to point out that "consistency" with real-time sync isn't a feature of small office type NAS units. Does this clarify my comments?


What I mean by consistency is just that the file systems need to be identical. It would be fine if this happens over time, especially given bandwidth limitations. The idea is that a user could access and edit a document (most likely doing so on the version stored inside the office on the local NAS, reducing latency from the previous setup which requires the document to be transmitted through the vpn) then have the change to the document or file system reflected on the remote server's file system.

Is there any way to do something like this at a reasonable cost? I definitely don't have the budget for enterprise-grade hardware.
m
0
l
October 13, 2014 12:41:09 PM

What type host is on the other end of the wire to synchronize to? Windows Server, Linux, Windows XP .... ?
m
0
l
October 13, 2014 2:21:16 PM

kanewolf said:
What type host is on the other end of the wire to synchronize to? Windows Server, Linux, Windows XP .... ?


The host is running Windows Server 2007. Our workstations are all running Windows 7.
m
0
l
October 14, 2014 8:38:40 AM

Hello Oliver. As I understand it, Kanewolf is drilling down into your environment and requirements. This is more of a question than an answer per se. Have you heard about or considered FreeNAS? If building a NAS yourself is viable as seems to be the case. Then FreeNAS may be worth a look. I did some work with it awhile back and know others who have used it. Software is free and if you have a suitable machine available FreeNAS may do the job for you. Kanewolf can probably provide additional comment regarding FreeNAS as a possible solution.

m
0
l
October 14, 2014 9:00:03 AM

Oliver Gappmayer said:
kanewolf said:
What type host is on the other end of the wire to synchronize to? Windows Server, Linux, Windows XP .... ?


The host is running Windows Server 2007. Our workstations are all running Windows 7.


With a windows server 2008 on one end of the line, the best alternative might be another Windows Server node. There are a number of features available in Server 2008 -- Robocopy and DFS are two options built into Windows server. You might want to read this article on file/folder sync on Windows servers.
m
0
l
!