First timer here and Roon noob. So I’m trialling Roon for the first time on my Synology DS920+, x2 HDD (RAID 1), 4GB ram, with about 2800 songs. Playing out of my Powernode 2i. Both NAS and Powernode 2i are connected via ethernet to a switch. Everything seems to run fine, but when researching I’ve read how the DB should be on an SSD or the 920+ is too slow, etc… I’m curious, am I missing something? I suppose for my purpose it’s fine but I’m trying to understand what am I losing out on with this setup over a recommended setup? Is there any long term negative effect by keeping this setup?
i had my roon database on a older Synology 1813+ for some time, but with much more albums than you.
no SSD inside, and it worked fine.
only searching took some time cause much files.
now i have a Intel NUC as Rock server and files still on the Nas
i think your Synology needs no SSD if searching time is ok with the number of your files
It’s fine for the files (your music) but Roon strongly recommend a SSD to serve the Core and it‘s database for very good reasons. Also: SSD are cheap now, so why take a malfunction risk here? Just generates support cases that could be avoided.
a DS920+ has to places for SSD-Cache function. So it would make sense to use ssd for quicker transfering/operation of the whole NAS
a SSD just for roon database (of 2800 songs) takes one space for bigger HD and is not needed if everything works fine, even if roon sys that
Again. The Syno has a capable USB3 port that an inexpensive controller and a128GB SSD could use. No slots or internal cache options consumed. I would disagree to encourage newbies to prefer spinning disks to hold the Core and the data base.
The requirements can vary by individual users. For trialing Roon and getting to know it, if it is working for you, great. Just enjoy the music and explore Roon. When you start thinking about where you want to go, then you can make some hardware purchase decisions.
An ssd is important for the database, but, as you have seen, it really depends on library track count. I would guess the avg Roon users has at least 10x more tracks than you in their library. Keep in mind that tracks added to your library from a streaming source like Tidal or Qobuz COUNT as though there were a local file in terms of database usage.
If you decided Roon is for you, then, you have a couple of choices. One would be to get an SSD and move Roon’s database to it on the Synology. Another, would be to setup Roon on a different computer, whether that is putting it on a PC you already own, or getting a NUC and loading ROCK to make a Roon appliance. Either way, that is not something you have to do immediately.
Obviously, if you start having some performance issues that will let you know it might be time to think about a hardware upgrade. But, if it is working now, then to repeat myself, just enjoy Roon.
As a side note: I have had Roon running on a NAS with a Core 2 Duo and only spinning disks for a library of 20k and while a bit slow in tasks, worked well enough. Now, I don’t really use that installation, it was more of a “try it and see” experiment to get a personal feel for how Roon performs on that level of hardware.
When I was much younger (and way much restless), I used two of them each with a 250GB SSD in a DS720+ (8GB RAM + 500GB cache, just because I had the M.2s around) fully dedicated to ROON (with the main storage linked to another NAS). I never used DSP (no need for it), I had only one end point working at one time and I had no problems at all. You should be even better if you’ll store your music on the same SSDs.
My father runs roon on a syno 918+ with a relatively small collection of local files. Myself, I used to run on a syno 716+ model with the db on an external ssd connected via usb. Though it’s underspecced it works just fine. Unless you experience dropouts, it will probably do just fine for now. You can always go with ROCK down the line if you need to. Enjoy your roon subscription!