Jump to content
RESET Forums (homeservershow.com)

Thinking of doing a NAS build with XPEnology.


itGeeks
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 32
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Drashna Jaelre

    11

  • itGeeks

    16

  • Poppapete

    2

  • schoondoggy

    3

The E3C236D2I looks like a nice board also, It just stinks it only has 6 SATA ports and it seems like no one has it in stock now. The board also looks like Intel Xeon E3-1200 v5 Series Processors only, Are you sure I can run something other on this board?  What controller would you recommend for the extra SATA ports I would need 10 in total? Another thing i really have to decide if I wan't to run EXPenology in a VM using Hyper-V what I am unsure of is can I pass all the storage threw Hyper-V without creating a RAID first on the VM Host? I would want to create the pool threw Synology not use a RAID card on the VM host. If I cant pass the RAW storage threw to the VM and create the pool on the VM running Synology then I would have to scrap the VM idia and run Synology bear-metal.

 

 

For they HyperV stuff, I'm not entirely sure what you mean.

 

But HyperV does support passing through raw disks. You set them offline in the host, and then it shows up as an option when adding disks to the VM. 

 

This can be single disks, or it can be RAIDed disks, as long as it's a "hardware RAID" (intel RSTe or card, but not dynamic disks or storage spaces)

 

 

Additionally, you can run HyperV Server off of a USB flash drive (and considering the board has an internal USB3 connector .... :)

https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/jj733589.aspx?f=255&MSPPError=-2147217396

 

 

 

 

Have you run Xpenology before? It seems like the support is fairly weak.

That's what I've heard to. Or more specifically, it's not supported at all. So support if something goes wrong may be tricky. And updates may completely break the "OS".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you run Xpenology before? It seems like the support is fairly weak.

Kevin no I have not and is one reason I am taking this slow. I also want to wait and see if the new DSM 6 will be supported because I want to use the new file system on this build. So far they support everything threw 5.2 but rumors have it that Synology has encrypted some of there code so it maybe the end of Xpenology but only time will tell. According to a post I read they are working on cracking that code but that sounds criminal to me and I still don't know if encrypting code is in violation of the licenses agreement of Linux so this is going to be an interesting wait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For they HyperV stuff, I'm not entirely sure what you mean.

 

But HyperV does support passing through raw disks. You set them offline in the host, and then it shows up as an option when adding disks to the VM. 

 

This can be single disks, or it can be RAIDed disks, as long as it's a "hardware RAID" (intel RSTe or card, but not dynamic disks or storage spaces)

 

 

Additionally, you can run HyperV Server off of a USB flash drive (and considering the board has an internal USB3 connector .... :)

https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/jj733589.aspx?f=255&MSPPError=-2147217396

 

 

 

 

That's what I've heard to. Or more specifically, it's not supported at all. So support if something goes wrong may be tricky. And updates may completely break the "OS".

Chris thanks for clearing this up for me, Just so we are clear I can pass-through the eight disk raw (un-raided) to the VM and let whatever OS I have on the VM create the Raid/Storage pool? And you are right this is complety unsupported and yes updates can and probably will will break Synology but that's the price you pay for doing something like like. You need the current DSM boot-loader for the version of DSM your trying to install for it to work so this creats a middle man so if the developers stop supporting then you stop, no way around it. Again this is just something I am toying with and I may decide to just keep paying Synology for there over priced hardware because I love there software. I personal think Synology should offer a paid version of there software to run on our own hardware and they would make even more money and stop all this Xpenology stuff, I would gladly pay good money for this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kevin no I have not and is one reason I am taking this slow. I also want to wait and see if the new DSM 6 will be supported because I want to use the new file system on this build. So far they support everything threw 5.2 but rumors have it that Synology has encrypted some of there code so it maybe the end of Xpenology but only time will tell. According to a post I read they are working on cracking that code but that sounds criminal to me and I still don't know if encrypting code is in violation of the licenses agreement of Linux so this is going to be an interesting wait.

Why is encrypting their code criminal? Unless it's directly based on a licensing type that explicitly requires them to release source .... and IIRC, it's definitely not, then reverse engineering it *may* in fact be illegal. 

 

That said, running your own NAS OS is nice. 

But you may be better off looking into stuff like Amahi or unRAID, rather than XPenology. 

 

 

 

Chris thanks for clearing this up for me, Just so we are clear I can pass-through the eight disk raw (un-raided) to the VM and let whatever OS I have on the VM create the Raid/Storage pool? And you are right this is complety unsupported and yes updates can and probably will will break Synology but that's the price you pay for doing something like like. You need the current DSM boot-loader for the version of DSM your trying to install for it to work so this creats a middle man so if the developers stop supporting then you stop, no way around it. Again this is just something I am toying with and I may decide to just keep paying Synology for there over priced hardware because I love there software. I personal think Synology should offer a paid version of there software to run on our own hardware and they would make even more money and stop all this Xpenology stuff, I would gladly pay good money for this.

 

Chris thanks for clearing this up for me, Just so we are clear I can pass-through the eight disk raw (un-raided) to the VM and let whatever OS I have on the VM create the Raid/Storage pool? And you are right this is complety unsupported and yes updates can and probably will will break Synology but that's the price you pay for doing something like like. You need the current DSM boot-loader for the version of DSM your trying to install for it to work so this creats a middle man so if the developers stop supporting then you stop, no way around it. Again this is just something I am toying with and I may decide to just keep paying Synology for there over priced hardware because I love there software. I personal think Synology should offer a paid version of there software to run on our own hardware and they would make even more money and stop all this Xpenology stuff, I would gladly pay good money for this.

Yup, Exactly.  By taking the disk offline, it means that it's not used by the host. 

 

If it makes you feel more confident, I've used this to create a Storage Space in a HyperV VM using this method (passed through disks). 

 

But don't take my word on it, "Server The Home" as a nice write up on this as well:

http://www.servethehome.com/hyperv-disk-passthrough-quick-guide/

 

 

As for the Synology thing. Why? Why should they? I mean, Apple doesn't? Why should they? 

They're not obligated at all, because they're not selling you the OS, they're selling you the whole bundle. The OS, the hardware, etc. They have literally no obligation to provide the OS, for the EXACT same reason that Apple doesn't (despite being based on BSD). 

 

See my point here? I'm not trying to say what you're doing is a bad thing, but the reasons you mention are based on shaky reasoning. And yes, I used to use the same reasoning once upon a time... 

 

 

And to the point, I'd pay good money for a working version of Windows Server that was still home oriented and included WMC support. But without violating the EULA, it's not possible. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, the 6 port thing is the downside.

However, Amazon does appear to have it in stock:

http://www.amazon.com/ASRock-Rack-E3C236D2I-Motherboard/dp/B01B9624AM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1454624647&sr=8-1&keywords=E3C236D2I

 

Also, you could use a controller card (such as an LSI card) to power the drives.  You could use the onboard to power 4 slots, and use a 4e 4i card to power the rest and add some expandability. :)

 

It's a bit pricier that way, but it works. 

Chris would you mind posting a link for the LSI card your talking about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is encrypting their code criminal? Unless it's directly based on a licensing type that explicitly requires them to release source .... and IIRC, it's definitely not, then reverse engineering it *may* in fact be illegal. 

 

That said, running your own NAS OS is nice. 

But you may be better off looking into stuff like Amahi or unRAID, rather than XPenology. 

 

 

 

 

Yup, Exactly.  By taking the disk offline, it means that it's not used by the host. 

 

If it makes you feel more confident, I've used this to create a Storage Space in a HyperV VM using this method (passed through disks). 

 

But don't take my word on it, "Server The Home" as a nice write up on this as well:

http://www.servethehome.com/hyperv-disk-passthrough-quick-guide/

 

 

As for the Synology thing. Why? Why should they? I mean, Apple doesn't? Why should they? 

They're not obligated at all, because they're not selling you the OS, they're selling you the whole bundle. The OS, the hardware, etc. They have literally no obligation to provide the OS, for the EXACT same reason that Apple doesn't (despite being based on BSD). 

 

See my point here? I'm not trying to say what you're doing is a bad thing, but the reasons you mention are based on shaky reasoning. And yes, I used to use the same reasoning once upon a time... 

 

 

And to the point, I'd pay good money for a working version of Windows Server that was still home oriented and included WMC support. But without violating the EULA, it's not possible. :(

Thanks for the link and all the great info. I understand what your saying here but lets face it Synology is not Apple, Google, Microsoft they are a very small piece of the pie in comparison. I understand the difference between controlled/uncontrolled environment and I am not saying what Apple does is a bad thing, Heck this is Y they have less problems then say Microsoft Windows because Apple is in control of the whole package. All I am saying here is Synology should consider a software only option for the enthusiast that want to build/roll there own, This would get Synology more revenue from the ones that would use XPEnology vs no revenue at all, If Synology can't sell the software because its a violation of Linux licence agree then they could give the software away with limited function and make us pay for a ultimate or whatever to get full access to there services such as package center, QuickConnect, Ect. You see what I am saying. Doing this would not hurt there overpriced hardware sales to a noticeable degree I don't believe because many customers love the turnkey solution also.

Edited by itGeeks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the link and all the great info. I understand what your saying here but lets face it Synology is not Apple, Google, Microsoft they are a very small piece of the pie in comparison. I understand the difference between controlled/uncontrolled environment and I am not saying what Apple does is a bad thing, Heck this is Y they have less problems then say Microsoft Windows because Apple is in control of the whole package. All I am saying here is Synology should consider a software only option for the enthusiast that want to build/roll there own, This would get Synology more revenue from the ones that would use XPEnology vs no revenue at all, If Synology can't sell the software because its a violation of Linux licence agree then they could give the software away with limited function and make us pay for a ultimate or whatever to get full access to there services such as package center, QuickConnect, Ect. You see what I am saying. Doing this would not hurt there overpriced hardware sales to a noticeable degree I don't believe because many customers love the turnkey solution also.

Software only versions of products like Synology are extremely expensive to support. Once you have no control over the hardware, you need a large help-desk staff to support. Even if you require that users run it in a VM, support is still an issue.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Synology can't sell the software because its a violation of Linux licence agree then they could give the software away with limited function and make us pay for a ultimate or whatever to get full access to there services such as package center, QuickConnect, Ect.

There is nothing forbidding you from selling software with GPL components such as the Synology DSM OS. All you need to do is provide the necessary source code for the GPLed parts and you're clear to charge whatever you want for your product. The rest of your product can be proprietory closed source.

 

Synology are using DSM as their value add to encourage you to buy their NAS boxes over somebody elses. That is the only reason they don't open up all of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Chris would you mind posting a link for the LSI card your talking about?

Sure:
(Note, Avago Tech bought out LSI a while back, but it's the same thing).
 
 
The Amazon link is ~$100 cheaper. So always good to price shop. ;)
 
 
But you can find a list of the different configurations here:
 
Just check the "specs" of the card in question, and it will list the Order Part number, which you can use to quickly find the items for purchase. 
 

Thanks for the link and all the great info. I understand what your saying here but lets face it Synology is not Apple, Google, Microsoft they are a very small piece of the pie in comparison. I understand the difference between controlled/uncontrolled environment and I am not saying what Apple does is a bad thing, Heck this is Y they have less problems then say Microsoft Windows because Apple is in control of the whole package. All I am saying here is Synology should consider a software only option for the enthusiast that want to build/roll there own, This would get Synology more revenue from the ones that would use XPEnology vs no revenue at all, If Synology can't sell the software because its a violation of Linux licence agree then they could give the software away with limited function and make us pay for a ultimate or whatever to get full access to there services such as package center, QuickConnect, Ect. You see what I am saying. Doing this would not hurt there overpriced hardware sales to a noticeable degree I don't believe because many customers love the turnkey solution also.

 

Schoondoggy said it better, but I have a point to add. So see below.

 

Software only versions of products like Synology are extremely expensive to support. Once you have no control over the hardware, you need a large help-desk staff to support. Even if you require that users run it in a VM, support is still an issue.  

 

That "no control over the hardware" bit is huge.

As somebody that does software support, it makes a huge difference. It means that if something goes wrong, I have to track down the cause. See if it is related to our software, or it's an underlying hardware issue. 

 

And if it's a hardware issue, I can't really support it, because it's not something we have control over and it's not what WE sell. And bad hardware will absolutely affect the software.  (in fact, I've had a few customers get pissed and request refunds because the issue was a hardware issue and I couldn't wave a wand and fix it). 

I generally do try to go above and beyond and help them identify the specific piece of hardware and give advice about what to do, but a lot of companies would say "not our problem", and close the ticket.

 

And that's a HUGE consideration for Synology. And it's one I'm absolutely certain they've thought about. And decided it's not worth the negative publicity for issues that aren't on their hardware.  

 

And the other issue, is selling a "pro" version for self install has other issues, such as liability, because they're selling the software. 

 

And support costs money. Even if 90% of it is giving boiler plate responses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...