I am outgrowing my RS217 and looking it to replace it with a 4-bay. Limitations are 1U and around 30cm depth, must support BTRFS, must be UPS aware, ideally with low power consumption with CPU performance requirements at the lower end of the scale.
Two options come to mind - the RX418 & RS819 and these are two very different units.
RX418 - The good:
It is cheaper, more available, requires much less power but will be effectively 'on' standby 24/7 along with my main NAS; offers much faster file transfers between volumes and Hyper Backup tasks due to eSATA link, plus easier management through the 'single pane' of my main NAS.
RX418 - The bad:
Can only ever be an expansion unit, does not offer a virtual air-gap between Hyper Backup and Hyper Backup Vault, cannot be used as an emergency NAS should the main NAS fail.
RS819 - The good:
It is a fully-fledged NAS with all the features. Consumes more power in use but can by offset by timed wake-up events such as Hyper Backup Vault tasks. Offers a virtual air-gap between prime and backup data (segregation). Can be used as an emergency NAS should the primary NAS fail.
RS819 - The bad:
Over £100 more expensive and less retail stock around. Most of the extra features will be of no relevance when primarily used as a Hyper Backup Vault. More heat produced when in actual use. Much slower file transfers and initial backup tasks due to the 1GbE link bottleneck.
So do I go for the cheap option that locks me in to an (admittedly faster) expansion unit built for the job, or do I find the extra money for a second proper NAS with more redundancy; albeit one bottlenecked by the 1GbE link?
[I would not be in this quandary if I had not had a Synology NAS die on me recently... my next 'spare' NAS has suddenly become a prime unit again... grumble, Atom bug... grumble]
Two options come to mind - the RX418 & RS819 and these are two very different units.
RX418 - The good:
It is cheaper, more available, requires much less power but will be effectively 'on' standby 24/7 along with my main NAS; offers much faster file transfers between volumes and Hyper Backup tasks due to eSATA link, plus easier management through the 'single pane' of my main NAS.
RX418 - The bad:
Can only ever be an expansion unit, does not offer a virtual air-gap between Hyper Backup and Hyper Backup Vault, cannot be used as an emergency NAS should the main NAS fail.
RS819 - The good:
It is a fully-fledged NAS with all the features. Consumes more power in use but can by offset by timed wake-up events such as Hyper Backup Vault tasks. Offers a virtual air-gap between prime and backup data (segregation). Can be used as an emergency NAS should the primary NAS fail.
RS819 - The bad:
Over £100 more expensive and less retail stock around. Most of the extra features will be of no relevance when primarily used as a Hyper Backup Vault. More heat produced when in actual use. Much slower file transfers and initial backup tasks due to the 1GbE link bottleneck.
So do I go for the cheap option that locks me in to an (admittedly faster) expansion unit built for the job, or do I find the extra money for a second proper NAS with more redundancy; albeit one bottlenecked by the 1GbE link?
[I would not be in this quandary if I had not had a Synology NAS die on me recently... my next 'spare' NAS has suddenly become a prime unit again... grumble, Atom bug... grumble]