Replace drives to expand Storage Pool

Currently reading
Replace drives to expand Storage Pool

79
3
NAS
DS920+
Operating system
  1. macOS
  2. Windows
Mobile operating system
  1. Android
  2. iOS
Last edited:
Hi

I would like to replace 3 SSDs in my Storage Pool with 3 HDDs of bigger sizes (red marked ones). I know it sounds strange but i need to send back the SSDs due to a wrong initial evaluation :cautious:

In the specific:

- I need to replace Drive 1 with an HDD of 16TB
- I need to replace Dive 2 with an HDD of 16TB
- I need to replace Drive 4 with an HDD of 2TB

I am currently using SHR. My Syon model is DS920+ (has hot swap)

How should I proceed? Do I need to replace one by one? those 3 SSds have now same sizes

many thanks in advance :D

Screenshot 2020-12-10 at 11.37.52.png
 
130
36
NAS
DS918+ (8GB RAM, 4x WD RED 4TB SHR) ; EATON Ellipse PRO 1200FR
Operating system
  1. Windows
Mobile operating system
  1. Android
Hello,
I see that there's not that much data on the existing volume.
Maybe you can move the data to a spare drive (if you have one) and rebuild the NAS storage from scratch since you are swapping 3 disks out of 4.
 

jeyare

Subscriber
1,746
576
as was written for 1.26TB of used capacity is better to start with new and clean SHR

just to be sure use same HDDs from same vendor product line and same geometry/firmware of logical/physical blocks is MUST, otherwise you will get slow and unstable storage for your valuable data.
 

Rusty

Moderator
NAS Support
2,826
864
www.blackvoid.club
NAS
DS412+, DS718+, DS918+, 2x RS3614RPxs+ with expansions
Router
  1. RT1900ac
  2. RT2600ac
  3. MR2200ac
Operating system
  1. macOS
Mobile operating system
  1. iOS
How should I proceed?
Solution a) start fresh, solution b) replace one by one. Still, if you go with solution B you will not be able to replace drive 4 with 2TB. Only the same or larger than the largest drive in the array, and in your case that's 16TB atm.

So if you keep on using that 2TB one, solution A will be your only option.
 
79
3
NAS
DS920+
Operating system
  1. macOS
  2. Windows
Mobile operating system
  1. Android
  2. iOS
Solution a) start fresh, solution b) replace one by one. Still, if you go with solution B you will not be able to replace drive 4 with 2TB. Only the same or larger than the largest drive in the array, and in your case that's 16TB atm.

So if you keep on using that 2TB one, solution A will be your only option.
as was written for 1.26TB of used capacity is better to start with new and clean SHR

just to be sure use same HDDs from same vendor product line and same geometry/firmware of logical/physical blocks is MUST, otherwise you will get slow and unstable storage for your valuable data.
Thanks for the hint. Unfortunately is a matter of time and I cannot backup and rebuild right now. So I think I replace drives (I got a 3rd 16TB HHD too btw).

As soon there is time I will rebuild the storage pool

just to be sure use same HDDs from same

Yeah all the 3 drives are Ironwolf (16TB)
 

jeyare

Subscriber
1,746
576
Just curious:
downgrade from initial architecture: 4x 1.92TB SSD (as was written one of your first posts) = based on Seagate SSD110 & 3D TLC technology

to 3x16TB +1x2TB HDDs based on low performance IronWolf

It’s must be really serious change of the NAS operation model.
 
79
3
NAS
DS920+
Operating system
  1. macOS
  2. Windows
Mobile operating system
  1. Android
  2. iOS
just to be sure use same HDDs from same

Just curious:
downgrade from initial architecture: 4x 1.92TB SSD (as was written one of your first posts) = based on Seagate SSD110 & 3D TLC technology

to 3x16TB +1x2TB HDDs based on low performance IronWolf

It’s must be really serious change of the NAS operation model.
The main problem is that one SSD is damaged and I am running now with 3 SSDs and 1 HDD and is not optimal. For this reason, and because I am going out the office for 1 month, I did not want to risk some damages or issues due the fact that I am mixing 2 kind of drives.
 

jeyare

Subscriber
1,746
576
- rather you can save investment to the IronWolf line and stay one month with 3 SSD in SHR1 = what is same as 4x SSD in SHR1 = same single disk failure tolerance.
- probability that you have rest of 3 damaged disks is really low. You can check it by SMART data (smartctl by CLI .... more you can find in this forum).
- from 5TB (initial storage size) to 48TB (to be) storage size it's really big jump
- you have to count to future with giant RAID rebuild time (in days), when similar problem occurs. Then better solution is sufficient backup policy and create new RAID from scratch (than rebuild). You will get faster your ata back in operation.
- then precise calculated final storage size can brings enterprise of Exos line performance for les money than low performed & large IronWolf HDDs (vs initial SSDs).

Or when you need primary fast and redundant storage, you can use RAID1 instead RAID5 for precise defined storage pool. With backup - there isn't problem.
 
79
3
NAS
DS920+
Operating system
  1. macOS
  2. Windows
Mobile operating system
  1. Android
  2. iOS
Firs of all, many thanks for you hints!
- rather you can save investment to the IronWolf line and stay one month with 3 SSD in SHR1 = what is same as 4x SSD in SHR1 = same single disk failure tolerance.
So this 1 month, the risks of issues, due the fact that I have 3 SSDs and one HDD in the same storage pool, are not that high as I initially thought?

- you have to count to future with giant RAID rebuild time (in days), when similar problem occurs. Then better solution is sufficient backup policy and create new RAID from scratch (than rebuild). You will get faster your ata back in operation.
That is true. So even if I used 2TB in my 48TB storage, rebuild times are still long?

Then better solution is sufficient backup policy
That's true. At the moment I am using USB Copy in Mirroring mode to backup files
 

jeyare

Subscriber
1,746
576
Last edited:
don’t worry 😉
and don’t take it as a shame, I was also on the beginners side (an always be)
people here share their experiences for others to avoid same mistakes

1. re first month of the operation
- you can lose all your disks. Yes there is really small probability for such scenario. Then you need search here for “smartctl” command line, that will answer if the chance is high or not

2. it’s right, that your valuable data needs your attention. But there isn’t difference between 3xSSD in RAID5 configuration for redundancy (SHR in your case). Advantage of the redundancy is based on “save” a time when you lose the array element (disk). Then you need evaluate how much you will spend with the array rebuild vs new array create and backup handling. Then you need balance size of the array. The array rebuild is about heavy impact to your NAS operation. Heavier than backup copy.

From my side it’s better for you (follow your situation)
- backup of your data to external target
- create RAID1 from two SSD
- make the third one as Spare for the RAID1 (really useful Feature)
Then you can sleep better w/o additional cost.
Then you can utilize your free-time with 30minutes calculation of your 3y expected data growth. Then you can compare Seagate Exos X line or 7E8 over the IronWolf and decide what is your target.

when you have Win based OS you can use Perfect tool called FolderSizes. You can read about it in this forum.
 

Rusty

Moderator
NAS Support
2,826
864
www.blackvoid.club
NAS
DS412+, DS718+, DS918+, 2x RS3614RPxs+ with expansions
Router
  1. RT1900ac
  2. RT2600ac
  3. MR2200ac
Operating system
  1. macOS
Mobile operating system
  1. iOS
So even if I used 2TB in my 48TB storage, rebuild times are still long?
In DSM7 rebuild will take less time considering it will focus only on the occupied size. But that is still 6m away from official release
 
79
3
NAS
DS920+
Operating system
  1. macOS
  2. Windows
Mobile operating system
  1. Android
  2. iOS
1. re first month of the operation
- you can lose all your disks. Yes there is really small probability for such scenario. Then you need search here for “smartctl” command line, that will answer if the chance is high or not
I simply did an advanced SMART test on all the disks and they seems to be healthy. Is the one in command line more accurate?
From my side it’s better for you (follow your situation)
- backup of your data to external target
I have tried to backup my 1.4TB with USB Copy on an external SSD. How come it takes more than 10 hours? There is a way to speed up the is process? I also tried via File Station to copy paste and same problem.
 

jeyare

Subscriber
1,746
576
Syno SMART test is just GUI over “smartctl” utility, as part of DSM. But the GUI result is really uncertain. Yeap, general answer is OK. Then CLI approach is more complex.

Re: backup speed, there are many factors:
1. 1.4TB = 1434MiB (1400MB), but old school will use original 1434MB
2. 10h = 36000 seconds
3. Then average speed is about 0.04MB/sec what is really bad

Q:
- external USB drive is connected directly to the NAS?
- what exact SSD is inside?
- what is the data mix (how many files, what is the part of files over 100MB)
 
1
0
NAS
RS1219+ with RX418, DS918+ with DX517, DS916+, DS416Slim, ...
Operating system
  1. Linux
  2. Windows
Mobile operating system
  1. Android
I simply did an advanced SMART test on all the disks and they seems to be healthy. Is the one in command line more accurate?

I have tried to backup my 1.4TB with USB Copy on an external SSD. How come it takes more than 10 hours? There is a way to speed up the is process? I also tried via File Station to copy paste and same problem.
Hi,
The time of transfer depends on the interface used USB2 or 3 or eSata.

your array will have the speed of the less speed capable drive which is the HDD of 16TB.
 
79
3
NAS
DS920+
Operating system
  1. macOS
  2. Windows
Mobile operating system
  1. Android
  2. iOS
Last edited:
external USB drive is connected directly to the NAS?
- what exact SSD is inside?
Yes the USB drive is connected to the Syno. It's a Lacie portable SSD.

The SSD used in the the NAS you mean? I have 3 Seagate Ironwolf 110. The HDD is also a Segate Ironwolf

what is the data mix (how many files, what is the part of files over 100MB)
The part of files over 100MB is circa the 40%
 

jeyare

Subscriber
1,746
576
Last edited:
@aGraphicz :
Your NAS SSD setup is well known :)

Deep dive:
Lacie external USB SSD, hm ... follow your transferred data capacity you must have 2TB in the disk encapsulated by Lacie. They use Kioxia 64layers TLC technology and Psion NAND controller with small cache size (pseudo SLC). Same used in Toshiba entry level products.
These kind of SSDs have problem with large amount small files copying, because when the cache is overflowing transfer speed is degrading to entry level HDD.

So and you have lot of small files in the transfer.
Your External disk is suitable for small amount of files with large size.
For such transfer (or backup) is better to use HDD. It’s continuously faster.

edit:
external HDD or SSD environment is complex like a car:
- you don’t purchase just car body, but the car specifications and also “brand”. Ofc there is a group who likes just pink color :cool:
- most of external disks have USB3.x or USB-C compatible external bus. It’s now like 4 wheels in car. But this specific information is far away from the entire car performance.
- more important is what is inside, ofc for what kind of purposes. Like engine, gear box, ...
- external disk capsule producers know it, then design is first. For them. They don’t care about purposes. They just care about profit. What is also OK. Also some exceptional products there.

Conclusion:
when the disk specification is based on short distance with fast performance, then you can’t use this feature for heavy load jobs.
For an emergency purpose is any external disk better than nothing. No doubt.
 
79
3
NAS
DS920+
Operating system
  1. macOS
  2. Windows
Mobile operating system
  1. Android
  2. iOS
Last edited:
@aGraphicz :
Your NAS SSD setup is well known :)

Deep dive:
Lacie external USB SSD, hm ... follow your transferred data capacity you must have 2TB in the disk encapsulated by Lacie. They use Kioxia 64layers TLC technology and Psion NAND controller with small cache size (pseudo SLC). Same used in Toshiba entry level products.
These kind of SSDs have problem with large amount small files copying, because when the cache is overflowing transfer speed is degrading to entry level HDD.

So and you have lot of small files in the transfer.
Your External disk is suitable for small amount of files with large size.
For such transfer (or backup) is better to use HDD. It’s continuously faster.

edit:
external HDD or SSD environment is complex like a car:
- you don’t purchase just car body, but the car specifications and also “brand”. Ofc there is a group who likes just pink color :cool:
- most of external disks have USB3.x or USB-C compatible external bus. It’s now like 4 wheels in car. But this specific information is far away from the entire car performance.
- more important is what is inside, ofc for what kind of purposes. Like engine, gear box, ...
- external disk capsule producers know it, then design is first. For them. They don’t care about purposes. They just care about profit. What is also OK. Also some exceptional products there.

Conclusion:
when the disk specification is based on short distance with fast performance, then you can’t use this feature for heavy load jobs.
For an emergency purpose is any external disk better than nothing. No doubt.
Thanks @jeyare :)

Using USB Copy (with Incremental mode) I was able to backup the files in 15 Hours.

The next time I run USB Copy, the backup process should be faster right?

However, I noticed that the files in the shared folder are slightly more compared to the ones that USB Copy was able to backup. In the specific in the shared folder there are 289208 files and 43635 folders.

In the backup from USB Copy I have 287524 files and 38023 folders.

Is this due the fact that the recycle was not included in the backup? The backup is however display as "Successfull" in USB Copy
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Welcome to SynoForum.com!

SynoForum.com is an unofficial Synology forum for NAS owners and enthusiasts.

Registration is free, easy and fast!

Trending threads

Top