Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[roflcopter666]

Need more space, and looking at 3-4 2 TB drives, running raid 5

What will work, and what should be avoided (have read WD advanced format drives)

Usual vendor has Seagate Sata 3 drives listed as well as WD Blue/Black/Green

Thanks in advance.

[JavaLawyer]

Need more space, and looking at 3-4 2 TB drives, running raid 5

What will work, and what should be avoided (have read WD advanced format drives)

Usual vendor has Seagate Sata 3 drives listed as well as WD Blue/Black/Green

Thanks in advance.

This isn't much of an answer, but the new beta firmware supports AFT drives, although D-Link never came forward with a published list of compatible HDDs.

[roflcopter666]

Thanks Java.

Is there any problem or known issues in mixing and matching drives - ie non AFT and AFT drives?  or for that matter older SATA and current SATA3 drives?

[JavaLawyer]

Thanks Java.

Is there any problem or known issues in mixing and matching drives - ie non AFT and AFT drives?  or for that matter older SATA and current SATA3 drives?

This is speculation, but I would be concerned that the different addressing (i.e. sector block sizes) for AFT vs. non-AFT may cause an issue in a RAID array (someone will need to validate this).  I always make an effort to use identical HDDs for consistency and to avoid potential incompatibilities.

[chrislee]

This isn't much of an answer, but the new beta firmware supports AFT drives, although D-Link never came forward with a published list of compatible HDDs.

I'm not a happy camper. The list of drives in the sticky is way out of date and only shows one 2TB drive which is no longer available.

 

So D-Link are effectively saying "we'll sell you the empty box but you're on your own after that". I've already been burned once with 3TB drives when there was nothing on the box to say 2TB max, and some of the (admittedly old) literature said it supported any size. I'm not an expert and to me a drive is a drive - I know Windows has a size restriction but the DNS-343 uses Linux so it shouldn't matter.

[JavaLawyer]

I'm not a happy camper. The list of drives in the sticky is way out of date and only shows one 2TB drive which is no longer available.

 

So D-Link are effectively saying "we'll sell you the empty box but you're on your own after that". I've already been burned once with 3TB drives when there was nothing on the box to say 2TB max, and some of the (admittedly old) literature said it supported any size. I'm not an expert and to me a drive is a drive - I know Windows has a size restriction but the DNS-343 uses Linux so it shouldn't matter.

I've been using eight Seagate ST32000542AS 2TB HDDs in my two DNS-343s for over two years now. However, all 8 HDDs are configured as Standard Volumes. The stability of these drives as Standard Volumes is not an indicator of RAID 5 stability. That is something you'll have to determine on your own. These drives are still available from a handful of vendors on Amazon.

[chrislee]

I'm not a happy camper. The list of drives in the sticky is way out of date and only shows one 2TB drive which is no longer available.

 

So D-Link are effectively saying "we'll sell you the empty box but you're on your own after that". I've already been burned once with 3TB drives when there was nothing on the box to say 2TB max, and some of the (admittedly old) literature said it supported any size. I'm not an expert and to me a drive is a drive - I know Windows has a size restriction but the DNS-343 uses Linux so it shouldn't matter.

Well, I ended up using WD Caviar Green 2TB drives. Everything came up cleanly, but I have a new  gripe...

I now have two volumes each called "Volume 1" on the DNS-323 and the DNS 343.

There doesn't seem to be any way to rename them.

I wouldn't even mind them being "Volume 1" and "Volume 2" but I'd rather give them meaningful names.

Do the people who write the software ever use it themselves? Do they consider what users might actually want to do?

[JavaLawyer]

I now have two volumes each called "Volume 1" on the DNS-323 and the DNS 343.

There doesn't seem to be any way to rename them.

I wouldn't even mind them being "Volume 1" and "Volume 2" but I'd rather give them meaningful names.

Do the people who write the software ever use it themselves? Do they consider what users might actually want to do?

I have two DNS-343s configured as Standard Volumes, leaving me with two Volume_1, Volume_2, Volume_3, and Volume_4. My PC network maps are by drive letter and for other devices I identify the NAS volumes by IP address. Sounds confusing, but everything works.

[chrislee]

I have two DNS-343s configured as Standard Volumes, leaving me with two Volume_1, Volume_2, Volume_3, and Volume_4. My PC network maps are by drive letter and for other devices I identify the NAS volumes by IP address. Sounds confusing, but everything works.

I'll have to do something like that. It's a bit disappointing - sometimes I wonder if the people who write the software (not just for D-Link) actually use it themselves as power users, or perhaps having written it they know all the do's and don'ts.

[JavaLawyer]

My decision was based on several factors: not knowing the stability of available 2TB HDDs in RAID 5 format; software-based RAID in the DNS-343; and RAID 5 issues (recovery/rebuild) reported by other users in this forum.