• 0
Nightingale

Xpenology "SHR" vs Windows Server 2016 "Pools"

Question

So I've been running different versions of Xpenology for a while now and when I think about it, the only real reason I like it is because I can use multiple types of drive sizes to create one volume.

 

My workplace recently bought a brand new Supermicro server valued over $15k USD and the IT guy was explaining how the "pools" work in the new Windows Server environment. Apparently, it's a rip of a Linux method of creating volumes which means this now works similar to SHR in that it can create volumes with multiple drive sizes without hiding a big chunk of data because it won't fit into an equal RAID amount.

 

For me the biggest plus would be if I have to restart my server, I won't have to rebuild the entire volume because windows server supports more than 12 drives unlike Xpenology on reboot. Not to mention hyperthreading power.

 

I was just wanting to hear peoples thoughts on this. Would you switch to windows server 2016? Why or why not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

No interest whatsoever in Windows Server.

SHR is overrated in my opinion.  Performance hits and LVM are not worth the tradeoff for me.  Disks are cheap.

 

Here's why I am on DSM:

  1. Don't have to pay exorbitant fees for Windows Server 2016
  2. Works well on low-cost hardware
  3. BTRFS snapshot management and replication UI
  4. Docker hosting and management UI

Now I can easily get some of these elsewhere (e.g. Portainer) but DSM offers a combination of features I need that keeps things simple.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I've actually looked at Server 2016 before as a replacement for SHR etc but didn't think it could the same job, as in thought it needed a whole bunch more drives and also SSDs??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

So I've still been looking into it and it appears to do all the same things as DSM.
Quoted from a Microsoft staff member:

Quote

 

With a mix of drives, the pool will move as fast as the slowest link. 

But it's not as bad as that sounds... as with S2D in a hybrid configuration like this, all I/O will land on the SSD caching devices and then will be later destagged to the HDD devices.  So the speed of the SSD's is really what matters to the app for the most part.

Usually not the best idea to just cobble together a solution out of random stuff you got lying around, but it will work  :-)

 

 

I use Xpenology because I can use my own server parts and build a reliable machine that has dual parity and can utilize multiple differing drive sizes. As @flyride has said, Windows Server is expensive, but on the other hand, Xpenology isn't really legit either and there are "copies" of WS 2016 commonly available. Not to mention, WS supports VPN per application as well as hyperthreading for when you might need it; "Plex Transcoding". I have dual Xeons in my Xpenology and DSM can't hyperthread.

I'm having trouble comparing Windows Server and Xpenology as everything that DSM offers, I would be able to do it in Windows Server...Unless there is something I haven't found yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.