Robbaut
2018-03-11 21:15:37
- #1
Thank you. 10W would be nice, I guess I'll have to take a look... The HP needs 25W when it has nothing to do and the hard drives are sleeping.
Power consumption in normal operation is also around 30W. When the hard drive is idle and powers down, the CPU throttles accordingly, saving about 10-15W. Runs 24/7. No, QNAP and the like are not much better.
Weak CPUs of course need a bit less power, but that’s not going to make a difference and never, ever compensates the higher purchase price.
But okay, that’s the difference between doing it yourself and buying ready-made. But when you see that besides that there’s also a collection of NUCs, Pis, and whatnot, I find that more than absurd. The thread title is "Planning the Network Cabinet" and not "Putting gathered boxes in a cabinet." That's without concept.
Hey Alex, why are you so against QNAP, Syno, and co? Have you had bad experiences with them? I could understand that then
For example, I simply don’t feel like putting that crap together, setting up the software, configuring it, and keeping it up to date. The extra free time is worth the extra cost to me.
Yes, they are. What you consume in idle state, my DS does under load, when everything is asleep, power consumption is somewhere around 7W – so half.
Then mount the Pis like blades in a 19" rackmount and it’s no longer senseless because everything is neatly built into the cabinet
I can’t speak for others here, but for me the Pis are at best tinkering projects, a hobby. The NUC is the central VISU and logic server and consciously a dedicated device. Edomi requires a 64bit architecture and CentOS. I consciously do NOT want to run that productively in a VM.
Keystone, in my opinion, only scores where the jack formats are inhomogeneous or even the smallest patch panel would be significantly under-equipped.Keystone? For that money, you might as well have an electrician do the work.
The title of the thread is "Planning the network cabinet" and not "putting collected boxes into a cabinet." That's without concept.
I see it the same way. Without structure, it’s just a junk cabinet with a glass door; and if no one cares about grounding in there, the cabinet could just be made of wood. I often see that the cable length is not considered with the cabinet depth and because it was chosen too tight, the doors remain open – then a fan practically just blows dust around. Then it really becomes a shelf. If the only thing in 19" format is the patch panel itself, then you can indeed just mount it on the wall with mounting brackets.Another perspective: Why even have a (large) 19" cabinet if "desktop devices" are just going to be stacked on shelf panels inside? The 19" cabinet is then as useful as a €20 Billy shelf that would fulfill the same purpose. You can place patch panels and switches on 19", the rest is almost better off in a shelf because it saves space (and is also cheaper)
As written, they are too expensive. Way too expensive.
The added value surely lies in the software. As written above, you don’t even need their hardware for that. It also works with your own hardware.
If you like, you can choose from a wide range of open source alternatives that offer similar functions to QNAP and Synology software. Without any fiddling.
But setting up and maintaining a bunch of Pis is fun for you instead?
The difference between your system and mine is, I have four hard drives, you only have two. One drive needs about 4W, QNAP doesn’t change that.
At the latest when a camera records, that no longer applies or I can only use one of the existing or an additional drive for this purpose, you will buy a new NAS...
The solution should be flexible and when I hear that people like to tinker and experiment, a self-built box with virtualization is the smartest because it is much more flexible than stacking individual little boxes. It’s cheaper too.
What speaks against running it in a VM?
Another perspective: Why even have a (big) 19" cabinet if “desktop devices” are to be stacked on shelves inside it?
I often see that ...