I have the machines in that configuration. I still can’t replicate any problems.
1 Like
@jbny I didn’t explain that well. Let me try again.
For example, Windows Storage Spaces supports several RAID models, with resilience to drive failure, higher speed, continuous availability, different levels of overhead, thin provisioning, multi-disk volumes, etc.
But in addition, if you put ReFS (Resilient File System) on that RAID, it monitors the multiple copies and if one copy has bit errors it repairs it from the other copies. This includes idle-time monitoring and repair. Regular RAID does not do that.
On Linux, btrfs and zfs do similar things. I don’t know Mac.
Cool stuff. But you need backup anyway, so…
i think this bit rotting stuff is normally an issue of the used filesystem, not if raid is used or not.
on the other hand, refs, which i dont know, seems to be another software layer on top of the used raid, which can correct certain errors.
softraid (on mac) can do similar corrections.
a better approach for all such correction solutions would be, that these bit rot errors would never be written to the filesystem in the first place.
i would love to use a more advanced filesystem on the mac to avoid such problems.
unfortunatly, apple did not go with zfs.
1 Like
One problem is, bits deteriorate after writing.
Another problem is, bits are corrupted because of bugs, e.g. in the drivers or storage controllers.
So in both cases, you need to monitor and correct.
That said, the risk of catastrophic failure is small. If a single album is damaged (which has happened), i’ll deal, worst case i’ll buy it again.
Bit rot is real but not a top-level worry. I live with regular backup which I want for other reasons.
yes, i agree that a monitoring is mostly still needed.
my point was, that from a logical point of view, its best to have systems, which could avoid much of such errors in the first place.
and i think also such corrections after monitoring could in certain cases not work.
anyway, that was an interesting conversation!
I have just the first and second of the three and Roon sees edits only when started. Otherwise I have to rescan each album as I edit. Probably some configuration error but hardly of any great concern.
Direct Attached Storage (DAS) - all the way. DAS is relatively glitch free and well supported in Roon. To me DAS is much more snappier then a NAS.
Re: Backup
5 Copies:
Working Data, no OS/boot (USB/SATA/TB Drive)
Back up 1 (USB/SATA/TB Drive)
Back up 2 (Tape Drive/CD/DVD/BD Disc)
Back up 3 (removable USB/SATA/TB/iSCSI)
Back up 4 (Cloud)
I can’t say it enough, have data hard drive (or SDD) (working data), a local Hard drive copy (back up 1), (optional) a second local copy (back up no.2) on a different media (Tape drive /CD/DVD/BD), and offsite backup and/or cloud back up (back up 3 & 4).
Anyone of these drives could be RAID, but you’d just be adding a greater cost an complexity. Back-ups are a disciplined effort.
@brian
I have the following set-up :-
Desktop PC, Windows10Pro (Insider), wired to local LAN : Core
Surface 3 Pro, Windows10Pro (Insider), WiFi to local LAN : Remote
Netgear ReadyNAS Ultra-4 Plus, 4MB RAM + 4*3TB WD drives, wired to local LAN : networked storage.
(Yes, I have another NAS running backups !).
According to your comment, if I make a change to any files on the NAS with my Desktop PC (Core) it’s very unlikely to be a problem. I can confirm this : when I edit metadata or rip using this PC and MediaMonkey (I never use Roon’s metadata editing) then I cannot flick back to Roon quick enough to see the change / update - the “connection” is too fast…all is good.
However, to contradict your comment, I can edit files on my NAS with my Remote, again using MediaMonkey - which leaves my Core out of the loop - but the changes I make are also (apparently) instantaneous.
I am of course happy with this situation (!), more so now that the Roon team fixed the connection problems that were happening some months ago, and hope that this information is of use…
[Note : I’m happily streaming MQA files to my Meridian Explorer-2 today, all is well, and both MQA / MQA Studio files are being decoded correctly].
+1
Back to the NAS vs DAS topic. There is a credible case for using Roon as an All-In-One Solution. Anyways, it’s a fact that it’s the simplest. It’ just one app, one PC, and One music library.
Those who eschew the NAS, it’s great for storage, still it’s important to understand the increased level of complexity.
Those who eschew a RAID level of storage, it’s great for maxium data speed and redunancy, still it’s cost is much higher than a single drive. Further RAID isn’t a back up.
Then we get to NAS & RAID, well it’s got the drawbacks of the above and it may be more than is needed for Roon. Still, it’s IT industry standard concept that provides excellent speed, storage, and redunancy.
I support all set-ups and personal choices, my choice is direct attached storage. DAS is simple.
What’s yours and why?
DAS - Direct Attached Storage works great. No brainer, just works. I started that way first when I went from physical to computer based playback (CD Player died so time to go computer).
NAS setups are not for the typical computer user. It is more than is needed for Roon if you are not IT/computer savvy.
For me going to a NAS was a great decision (and I have done IT for years). There is increased backup speed, redundancy of disks (raid & using a proper backup strategy including offsite storage), and central location to play music from any computer in the home.
1 Like
My library’s not that big so I upgraded the HD in my mini to a 500GB SSD. It’s fast, and since I leave the mini on its always available. The mini is directly attached to my DAC for now.
I did my a small Synology NAS for music, but for now it’s the backup of my mini, as well as a generic household server/backup. But I try and let it sleep most of the time as I don’t like the idea of the power useage. I don’t really like the added delay of using a NAS directly for files, but that may change as I have a sort of ‘second tier’ file set of experimental DSD etc that I don’t have on the mini but might start accessing those over NAS.
If I ever get a network endpoint setup with Roon (with some way to do Room Correction), I can easily expand the mini with USB drives, but at that point since everything will be going over the network I might switch to the NAS as primary storage - speed dependent. I don’t know if I’d ever upgrade the internal drive again. What a stupid design from Apple (deliberate I’m sure). It’s not too difficult other than being fiddly, but I’m guessing those tiny connectors have a very limited life for being plugged and unplugged, and if they go it’s a world of pain. (As an aside, as someone who grew up with Apple after converting early in my professional career, and having built a small business using pro machines, I absolutely hate the direction Apple have taken with their domesticifaction and dumbing down of the hardware/software and making them hard to upgrade. They could easily have satisfied both camps - now they’re pretty much walking away from the pro market. Anyway…)
If we’re one day able to have our libraries remote via Roon (or I do if another way) then that would have a bearing too, depending on what data I’d trust to be ‘Internet facing’
[quote=“hifi_swlon, post:31, topic:7572”]
I don’t really like the added delay of using a NAS directly for files[/quote]
Not doubting you saw a delay, but I see no delay of my NAS serving music from Redbook to DSD. And I never experienced any delays (playback issues, etc.) when I did move from DAS to NAS.
As testing client/server, I use HQP as my endpoint until the new Sonore product comes out and have had no issues. And it keeps Roon and HQP on separate machines.
I love the Client/Server aspect of Roon and it works very well in my home network - which is a wired network for music (GB Cat-7 and Fiber).
Ah yes, well I could probably minimise the delay, but my environmental ‘policy’ at home pretty much forbids me not to let old school drives spin down and things go into as low a power state as possible… I have gig-e but even so found when adding files etc, or skipping tracks, local SSD was far better than NAS. All relative and I’m sure if I switched I’d just get used to it.
Incidentally, I’ve also got my eye on the micro rendu (assuming that’s the one you meant), but thought I’d try a pi or standard cubox when roonspeakers is released. I even prepped with a Chinese LPS. Just holding out for a compatible room correction solution, even a basic one.
I’m a big believer re: keeping computers out of my music room. I’m mostly an analog guy anyway (still spend about 50% of my audio time playing those slow inefficient black vinyl thingies). I’m reluctantly using an ethernet connection to a Modwright Transporter to stream Roon into my music room. So no “computers” in the room, excepting the Transporter which is a very slim noise-footprint device.
For my previous Logitech Media System, I was using a Windows Home Server computer running on a NAS, so it was easy enough to add a new Brix to the network to run Roon and point it to the NAS server to find the music files. I think it took me all of 10 minutes to set Roon up, and most of that was installing the software. I’m surely not a typical use-case for the average consumer.
Not a fan of the one-box Roon solution: I did see the thread about the pernicious effects of computer noise on audio playback. Even if located on the other side of the room, very difficult to control noise effects. Electronic noise is another reason I do not use powerliines for signal transfer… There’s already enough electronic noise on my power lines that I want to avoid in my music playback, why add more?
If I didn’t have my NAS already, I probably would have put a 1TB SSD in the BRIX, which would handle my small collection of only 2,800 digital albums. So I guess I’m agnostic regarding NAS vs. DAS.
1 Like
The comments here that RAID is really complicated baffle me. My RAID (a 2-drive WDMyCloudEX2, RAID Level 1) just worked out of the box and shows up on my computer as a network drive. I use it like any other mounted drive. I pointed Roon at it via SMB and play from without delays (even DSD and 24/192 tracks) over wireless.
Sure, when I tried to make it a media server via DLNA, it got all confusing (Twonky isn’t very user-friendly), but that’s got nothing to do with RAID or NAS.
-mike
Sure, they are not complicated to use. My concern is with adding machinery to an audio computer, with all the hardware and complex software/firmware processing. I read about some company making a very expensive music server, with bespoke everything, battery power and all kinds of stuff – and then they put four spinning drives and a RAID controller in there! I think my simple NUC with SSDs and a fanless case has less noise.
But RAIDs are great for other things. I have one RAIDed NAS, one PC with hardware RAID, one with Windows “Storage Spaces” software RAID, all great.
Just not in the music player.
Interesting that you prefer DAS over NAS. I thought the audiophile preferences is to keep spinning hard discs as far away as possible from audio equipment.
you can have a DAS distant from your audio stuff. for example with a usb cable connection.
I also thought long USB cables were frowned upon.
My preference is to keep media servers as far away from audio equipment as possible, too. In “real life” all of my zones are networked.
The same is probably true for @rbienstock, since he is using network-based Meridian gear.
I don’t really see USB devices direct-connected to a busy media server as the best long-term solution regardless of where the disks are. The interconnect wasn’t designed for long cables, and it adds more cost to do a good job at electrically isolating a USB port than an Ethernet port.