Storage thoughts

Are you dense? This literally states you are not sure and you don’t know. This leaves your question WIDE OPEN to suggestions. You have absolutely zero rights to be upset when you ask a question like this and people throw suggestions at you.

No NAS, sure OK, but you gave reasons that are potentially solveable, so people WILL try to solve them.

Did you even read my post? I stated ECC in a NAS :man_facepalming:

You do know you could even run ZFS locally on your PC right? This is also an option if you ware willing and able to run ECC, and willing to use enough RAM to accelerate things. Again, this is up to you, and only offering IDEAS, not telling you what to do or how you should do things.

Fair enough, but just for the record, you do know you can just do a point to point link without a switch right?

I did not second guess, it’s not even a second throught to me that such a solution would require data redundancy. Running without it is a dingus move in my field of work. I am so sorry that I was concerned for YOUR data and I was not willing to provide an first option that would risk it.

What I recommend/suggest reflects on me and my reputation as a server admin. What do you think anyone that trusts my opinion would think of me if I started suggesting as a first option things that were dangerous and could lead to massive data loss without first explaining the dangers?

Personally I run RAID0 in my VM for the same reason as you, games can be re-downloaded. Don’t think I am insistent on such technologies when there is no need for them.

You directed a response directly at me, I have every right and reason to respond.

Then go find another forum to be a member of if this entire community is incapable of helping you.

Why would you be? I don’t know what your level of experience is, this was not an insult, but an explanation as to why I offered what I did. Stop being so sensitive.

omg, you are laughable. I never once suggested this is the case. If you want to read into things in such a way then go right ahead and keep living in fairy tale land.

A big problem is YOU THINK you were ignored. Providing alternative solutions that you may have overlooked is NOT ignoring your requirements. If you reject what is offered, fine, no harm done, and no need to get snotty about it.

We do not know you, we can not read your mind, we can not know what your level of experience is, nor what technology you are aware of or have been exposed to. Prompting you to consider alternatives may yield a better solution for you then you had initially thought of. This is how progress is made.

It’s a way of asking for someone’s opinion about something. My opinion is that your options both are not optimal and you should approach the issue from an entirely different way if at all possible.

You do know that I only posted ONCE, last night, and after seeing you do not find my additional suggestions helpful I accepted this and moved on.


Note also my suggestions:

All are “If you” … there are NO assumptions about your needs or requirements here, they simply addressed your prior rationale for rejecting a viable solution most would be happy with. I was NOT telling you to get a NAS, I was providing potential solutions that might make a NAS a viable solution for you.


I always find the best results are obtained when asking for peoples free time and then arguing with their advice…

Different size disks = just JBOD it.

You’ll have no resiliency but if you’re not interested in right sizing the hardware and repurposing stuff that doesn’t fit an array that’s about all you’re going to get.

Pretty sure even windows can do JBOD via just adding disks to a dynamic disk.


Actually went back and re read the op again; I had seen it earlier and anticipated the dumpster fire. Because of the unrealistic and conflicting goals.

I’ll add this

You say you’re lazy. Well here’s a tip

Tiering is bullshit and more trouble than it is worth. Even enterprise vendors have mostly abandoned it because it’s shit and doesn’t work.

You’ll either spend time micromanaging your content manually shifting it around, time trying to tune auto tiering and/or wasting bandwidth migrating content etc.

Just don’t. Keep it simple.

JBOD, or get some sort of sane set of drives (anppropriate for your level of speed/redundancy) and donate the ones that aren’t suitable to other people or systems.

Otherwise you’re just trying to force square pegs in round holes.

As @gnif said a bunch of people here including myself are paid to do this stuff as a day job and have been for years/decades.

We’ve seen, made or repaired mistakes, been burned by failure and will point out bad ideas as bad ideas.

You’re free to take that for what it’s worth or not - but arguing with people because the demonstrated reality or informed opinion doesn’t match your expectations, or blaming others for making incorrect assumptions about your shifting goalposts isn’t going to help.


Is it that bad? I am very similar in mindset to OP and have collected a similar setup over the years.

I have never experienced any mental load or consternation over where I put my data.

I understand you. I had a similar experience in another thread. The people here that are professionals are entrenched in their own little enterprise world and it’s difficult for them to see how the solutions they’re used to do not apply to normal consumer use cases.

But my first question is, where the heck are you even putting all these drives? Aren’t you running out of ports on your MOBO? :sweat_smile: (That’s a situation where you’d need to consider something like a NAS out of sheer inability to plug more drives in your current machine.)

I am new to linux myself and just learned about bcache from this thread. It looks cool.
Based on your drives I’d probably just consolidate each technology on its own and call it a day.

If you were playing games or doing work that did not involve editing massive files I’d maybe consider putting the small 256G drive as a bcache for the HDDs, but from what you’ve said that seems to not apply to you.

So I’d basically have NVME volume, SSD volume and HDD volume and be done. But then again I have no trouble with organizing my data and if the extent of your laziness, as you put it, reaches beyond a short consideration of “do I want nvme, ssd or hdd speeds for this piece of data” then the best advice I think I can offer is “just jbod everything” and go out and have a coffee or beer with some friends using the saved time and effort.
P.S. I think you said you already have a satisfactory backup solution, but if you don’t, with so many drives I’d consider dedicating some space to serve that function.

That’s a pretty big (and idiotic) assumption to make. For home use I am all for making best use of what drives I have available based on my personal budget and energy costs. Just because I work professionally with enterprise gear doesn’t mean I snob off the cheap options for non-mission critical scenarios.

My home office is a hodgepodge of recycled/used/repaired gear. I have a plethora of HDDs of varied ages, sizes, types, brands, even going as far back as IDE and a VERY old MFM drive. Most are still in use.

Get a used SAS controller for $30 and use a breakout to give you a ton of SATA compatible ports. A NAS is just a computer configured to share it’s storage out. The advantage of a NAS is in the offloading of the management of that data to a system dedicated to it.

Based on my 30+ years of experience from home PC usage and support through to what I am into today, working with every storage solution you have ever known plus some you likely have never heard of, what the OP is asking for here is just asking for problems, which my personal AND professional experience has taught me, the hard way, more times then once.


Enterprise versus home is nothing to do with it.

Cheap (either $ or time or both)

Pick two
You can’t have it all.

I’d you actually care about keeping your stuff, choose something that works. Not some janky half assed setup that will just add complexity and not actually be reliable.

If you don’t and you’re lazy JBOD it.


All I can do I sigh and wish it were an assumption and I hadn’t been repeatedly told “spend more money so you can deploy the enterprise solution”.
(By other people. I have nothing nothing against your persona. First time I even interact with you.)

And not having a setup is probably the least janky setup, as it were. I think that’s what OP is going for. :slight_smile:

But yes. Pick 2. Except sometimes you don’t get to pick. It is picked for you.

This IS an assumption, do you think that just because we use this gear in an enterprise environment where our bosses pay for this stuff means we can afford it at home too?

We are all in the same boat my friend, the difference is that the exposure we have had to these systems has helped to inform us better then general consumers such as yourself.

Do I wish I had the $$$ for a big budged multi petabyte ZFS system at home? Hell yes!

Do I have one at home? Yes, but not big budget, certainly not > 10TiB, and certainly not high performance. Only after many years of janky setups like the OP here and then gathering enough cash to build one out of old/used parts I sourced from eBay/AliExpress, etc. It’s still not optimal, but it’s better then what I had.

Why was I motivated to set one up? because I lost data without even knowing I had done so due to bit-rot. It was not because I thought I should have one, but because I lost data that was important to me and my backup solutions did not and was not able to detect this bit-rot (note, most are not).

I have read your other threads on here, I can see that you are just starting out with your first NAS type setup and I can see that you are also doing it on a budget with old recycled equipment (like most of us).

You like the OP here asked for advice on how to best manage the storage you have available, and when given answers you don’t understand/agree with, you can’t see how they come from years of experience of making the same mistakes you are about to make here.

Note, I personally do not like ZFS due to the lack of user friendly recovery tools, you need to know it’s design back to front to recover data from a fully degraded pool. However the only time I had a degraded pool was due to running ZFS without ECC because I couldn’t afford it, and on old SATA HDDs, because I couldn’t afford better. And I didn’t have a UPS, because I couldn’t afford one.

So stop assuming that you’re being told what to do. Nobody here told the OP what to do, but rather suggested a better solution to his problem and instead of just simply saying “no, I do not want this”, he gave reasons for not wanting it that in the eyes of others here were solvable problems and worth mentioning as such.

These days there is NO excuse to not use enterprise grade equipment for a personal/home NAS if you’re investing in hardware to build one, as it can be had used/cheap on flee markets as providers do not like to recycle hardware for mission critical applications that may cost them millions in liability if things go wrong. Mine literally cost me < $200 for a 1RU Dell chassis with a 12 core Xeon and 32GB of ECC ram on eBay. As a bonus it also became a VM server and performs other tasks too now.

Several years later instead of needing to rebuild this entire system I upgraded by throwing in a 10GBe NIC (also used) and a SAS disk shelf I got at a govt. auction for ~$100. I can now scale this system up to 16 disks, using cheap used cold spare (essentially new old stock) SAS drives you can find on eBay for $40-$120.

Last edit sorry:

There are good reasons why I keep saying SAS and not SATA too.

  1. SAS drives have a FAR longer MTBF (mean time before failure) as such used drives are perfectly fine for non-mission critical applications and can be had very cheap because no professional in their right mind would deploy one for such use.
  2. The consumer SATA link itself is guaranteed to have undetectable read errors at a rate of 1 per 10TiB of data transferred. Enterprise SATA is 10x better at 1 per 100TiB of data transferred, still not great. Where SAS starts at 1.1PiB before a single read error is to be expected.
  3. Most people can’t use a SAS drive and as such it keeps the price of used SAS drives low. In fact, I have bought them and often I get brand new old stock that was just spares some DC had sitting on a shelf somewhere for servers they have now deprecated.

A good read: SAS vs SATA | What Is the Difference & Which Is Better? | ESF



It’s a case of working out what i ACTUALLY need to keep and making that reliable.

Have a couple of hundred terabytes at work, but home is 4 TB configured to not die.