Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I am considering a Synology DS1511+ for my a development network. I was going down the Drobo Pro FS road until I discovered that their performance is fairly weak. This is sad because a friend of mine founded the company.

Other friends haves suggested a Synology device instead.

Has anyone had experience with them particularly when a drive goes bad or handling other issues?

share|improve this question

closed as off topic by Sam Jan 19 '12 at 11:29

Questions on Server Fault are expected to relate to server, networking, or related infrastructure administration within the scope defined by the community. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about reopening questions here.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

up vote 1 down vote accepted

My only first-hand experience with Synology devices is their DS209, and it was pure joy to work with. I decided on Synology after researching many of the NAS devices currently available, with a focus on high performance.

The real shining star is their DSM 3.0 software, which I only fully came to appreciate after having a chance to use it. When you log into the web console, you are presented with a basic desktop environment implemented in AJAX. It's extremely responsive, and very useful for exploring the myriad options available. All of their NAS devices use the same software, and no features are artificially locked out. This means that even entry-level devices have access to powerful features.

For any entry level user, and even some power users, I would absolutely recommend Synology. I am even considering buying one for myself (an IT professional) because sometimes it's nice to have something that "just works" (as larsks said).

PS. I am not affiliated with Synology in any way, I just love their products!

share|improve this answer
What ultimately made me decide on a homebuilt solution was (a) cost (my entire server -- with disk -- cost as much as an unpopulated DS1010+) and (b) I really wanted the features that come with ZFS -- data integriry, snapshots, writeable clones, and remote replication. So I ended up running FreeBSD, which has been an interesting experience in itself since most of my experience has been with Linux. – larsks Jan 22 '11 at 3:17

This and this blog entry may make interesting reading. I ended up making the same decision as the blog author and chose to build my own fileserver rather than purchasing a Synology device (which had previously been my top choice).

It's fun project and a great learning experience, but if your goal is to get something that Just Works the Synology devices look quite nice.

share|improve this answer
Nice blog references. Thank you. I have a Dell 2900 server that I am trying to get HyperV running on. That's enough of a learning experience for now. :) – rboarman Jan 22 '11 at 0:50
+1 Most of the packaged devices concentrate on simplicity and features that are good enough for most users. If you want specific features or performance, be prepared to roll your own setup or fork out plenty of cash. – Chris S Jan 22 '11 at 3:13

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.