Print

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

[JavaLawyer]

The manual says the system support JBOD+RAID1. JBOD will perform slower than RAID 0 since the HDDs store data contiguously rather than use striping.  Other than that, the differences (from a user perspective) should be similar.

Again, I haven't personally used this configuration, so I can't comment on the functionality.

[loloaqic]

The manual says the system support JBOD+RAID1. JBOD will perform slower than RAID 0 since the HDDs store data contiguously rather than use striping.  Other than that, the differences (from a user perspective) should be similar.

Again, I haven't personally used this configuration, so I can't comment on the functionality.

I configured a RAID1 and ended up with 2 volumes, each of 2TB.
I reconfigured as RAID1+JBOD and ended up with a 2TB RAID1 volume and a 4TB JBOD volume.
Currently running as a RAID5 6TB volume, but the performance is woeful compared to the RAID1.
I'd love to get a Single 4TB RAID1+RAID0 for best performance, or as second best a 4TB RAID1+JBOD.
I don't like my chances though. 

[JavaLawyer]

I am thoroughly confused myself. The language used in the DNS-343 manual "RAID 1 + JBOD" is the industry standard nomenclature used to describe a nested array, yet all your attempts yielded two separate arrays a R1 and a separate JBOD. 

[JavaLawyer]

Given the ambiguity of the language in the manual and your many failed attempts, I reached out to my D-Link contact on this forum to see if we can establish a definitive answer (for better or worse).

[JavaLawyer]

. . . I'd love to get a Single 4TB RAID1+RAID0 for best performance, or as second best a 4TB RAID1+JBOD.
I don't like my chances though.  

After all this hard work I don't want to be the bearer of bad news, but I received a response back from D-Link which came directly from within the DNS group.  I was informed that nested arrays are not supported by the DNS-343. Despite the industry standard nomenclature, the user manual language "RAID 1 + JBOD" is not an indicator of nested array support, but rather an indicator that you can create independent (side-by-side) RAID 1 and JBOD configurations.

 

[loloaqic]

After all this hard work I don't want to be the bearer of bad news, but I received a response back from D-Link which came directly from within the DNS group.  I was informed that nested arrays are not supported by the DNS-343. Despite the industry standard nomenclature, the user manual language "RAID 1 + JBOD" is not an indicator of nested array support, but rather an indicator that you can create independent (side-by-side) RAID 1 and JBOD configurations.

 

Thanks JavaLawyer for your efforts to get some clarity on what I can only describe as poorly written manuals.
It looks as if I am NOT going to achieve my initial goal. So I'll start to research alternate solutions.
Regards and thanks again.
Bye.

[JavaLawyer]

Thanks JavaLawyer for your efforts to get some clarity on what I can only describe as poorly written manuals.
It looks as if I am NOT going to achieve my initial goal. So I'll start to research alternate solutions.
Regards and thanks again.
Bye.

A not-so-elegant compromise is a scheduled backup from your first RAID 1 set to your second RAID 1 set.

However, it should be noted that the on-board DNS-343 backup software incremental backup option does not delete files in the destination HDDs that are not in the source HDDs. This means that your backup copy will grow larger over time. You'll have to use a third party application (on a PC) to clear the delta between the two RAID sets. This is the solution I use to synchronize my two DNS-343s.