One large HDD -vs- lots of smaller HDDs for storing games/DAZ assets, etc.

[79flavors]

Another thread here in Dev Help got a little sidetracked with a discussion about storing DAZ assets on one large hard disk verses

You must be registered to see the links

made up from many smaller disks.

I just wanted to add (without derailing that thread further) that you don't need to buy expensive specialist hardware to run a NAS (Network Attached Storage) device for a RAID array.
Don't get me wrong, boxes like

You must be registered to see the links

are great - but there's a cheaper option if you are a bit of a PC components hoarder

I don't know about everyone out there, but over the years I've ended up with a few "spare PCs". Machines that weren't up to the modern gaming needs. Sometimes it's entire machines, sometimes it's been slowly replacing components to the point where the "spare" components left over were enough to build a 2nd PC.

There are projects out there like

You must be registered to see the links

. Entirely free software solutions that will run on practically any hardware... and those hardware requirements are pretty low. Low enough that that crappy old PC you couldn't give away will probably run it. Stick in 3+ hard disks and you've got your own custom NAS/RAID array.

You must be registered to see the links

, which is the file system used, is massively flexible. Found another HDD in a cupboard?... ZFS will just accept it as extra space without any real complications. You can mix different sizes and speeds of hard disks too.
Your only limitation is that the more hard disks you add, you'll need a power supply that will provide enough power... and you can't add 7 HDDs to a machine with only 6 SATA ports for example.
My TrueNAS boots from a USB stick, so I'm not even wasting disk space for the operating system.

Anyway, I just wanted to dispel the idea that NAS/RAID arrays are expensive. They can be. But they can also be as cheap as that old PC in the cupboard in the spare bedroom.

Also a reminder: Raid arrays are NOT a replacement for a good backup strategy. Yes, if 1 hard disk dies in a Raid5 configuration, you probably won't lose your data. But if 2 die... you're toast. That power spike you thought would never happen is probably going to blow everything, not just 1 disk. Likewise, if your house burns down or someone breaks in a steals your computers... that raid array you backup everything onto is not going to help you.

 

[anne O'nymous]

Also a reminder: Raid arrays are NOT a replacement for a good backup strategy. Yes, if 1 hard disk dies in a Raid5 configuration, you probably won't lose your data. But if 2 die... you're toast. That power spike you thought would never happen is probably going to blow everything, not just 1 disk. Likewise, if your house burns down or someone breaks in a steals your computers... that raid array you backup everything onto is not going to help you.

This is probably the most important part.

Investing in an

You must be registered to see the links

, or at least a quality surge protector one, should be the first step. With a cheap USB drive as temporary backup. Then only it would be time to think about using a NAS, not as storage, but as backup through raid 5. And obviously, the said NAS is plugged on the said UPS/surge protector.

And also remember that backup are a security. It's a copy of the files on your computer, and only a copy. Ideally you have the original on your computer, a copy on a NAS (or something else), and a copy on an USB drive, that you plug once a day to copy your files, and keep "hidden" the rest of the time.
Here, "hidden" meaning somewhere a robber wouldn't care to look, yet somewhere where you can easily and quickly take it if you'll to left the house in hurry, because it's on fire by example ; behind books by example.

It will still left one risk, a fire when you aren't home, but no one can protect against all dangers.

 

[Sagisu]

I've got in home:
- PC with 5 drives (1 HDD and 4 SDDs) to keep things I'm currently working on (I'm a developer and I've got massive amount of projects and assets, I'm also having fun with 2d - Photoshop - and 3d - Blender - so I need there some fast accessible discs for that)
- NAS raid (Synology) to store some important things (company paperology for legal reasons, private photos etc.)
- Disc matrix based on Raspberry to keep archived things that are not that important, but I don't want to get rid of them and additional backup (~ once a month, but it's more or less frequent)

But yea.. my workbench just looks like some kind of command center, so all of that just fits in =p

And yea - for backup I've got most of my documents (scans or e-invoices) I store in cloud service and my personal things (like photos) I've got on separate disc at my parents (not connected to computer) =3

On similar matter - I keep all my credentials on password manager (I use different passwords everywhere and I need to remember only 3 of them - to pass manager, to my email account and to my banking account). I used to have keepass db stored in cloud (so I could reach it everywhere), currently I'm keeping everything in Bitwarden (which DB I also backup =p).

Does it mean I should wear foil hat? =p

 

[79flavors]

Does it mean I should wear foil hat? =p

 

[dazporn]

I recently had an electrical surge originating from the phone line of my VDSL modem destroy my Netgear NAS 4-bay raid array which took down all of the 4 drives along with it as both of these devices were connected to the same power strip which was connected to the UPS. Even though the UPS had surge protection, it could not protect against the surge propagating across devices at the outlet.

The point is that in this case, my 4-drive NAS array was as vulnerable as a single large drive. The raid arrays can only protect you from disk failures, but doesn't offer any other reliability. And given their expense I am now debating the justification compared to automated scheduled backups which would have been more cost effective.