Requirements for Proposed Replacement NAS Box

[TerryJC]

Hi,

It has been suggested that the River System is quite vulnerable to an electronics failure in the NAS Box. The current device has been running now since approximately early / mid 2020, but the D-LINK hardware was purchased in 2016. Even then it was not a brand new design and the manufacturer stopped supporting it many years ago.

When Hamish configured this device for WMT use he had considerable difficulty because of the incredibly old Linux kernel version that D-LINK had used. In order to use a reasonably up to date database he had to recompile the kernel and many of the tools and utilities. It is not possible to take this any further.

All of the above leads to the conclusion that sooner or later the current NAS Box will have to be replaced. Thee are a number of solutions for this and I have listed them all in the attached first draft of a Requirements Spec for a replacement. At this stage, it is uncertain when this activity will occur, so please consider this document as being for discussion at the forthcoming Jitsi Meeting on Monday 8th August at 1700.

[hamishmb]

Good idea to post here, here are some of my notes:

Note that I didn't compile a new kernel - we decided not to as that would require disassembling and flashing the NAS box, with potential to break/brick it. I did, however, compile pretty much everything else, and was unable to update the database or webserver-related components due to hardware and kernel version limitations.

Modern Debian can probably be run if we decide we want to do that now, though I have no idea how long Debian will support hardware this old (armv5 CPU, vs the 2012 Raspberry Pi 1's armv6 CPU, which was already largely unsupported in 2012). I would wager on it not being much longer, and it would likely be a bad experience anyway due to the poor hardware specifications.

Also note that the engineer GUI will need an update to run on newer PHP/MySQL versions, as I had to intentionally code it with old APIs due to the outdated software on the NAS box. These changes are trivial (10-30 minute job) to make so this is not a concern.

[TerryJC]

Hamish,

Thanks for your comments. I'll include them in the next version of the document after Monday's Meeting.

I have done a very Quick and Dirty Cost Estimate for the various options for this replacement. Again it's provided to support the discussion on Monday.

[TerryJC]

Having spent a bit of time looking at further alternatives, I've included two other routes:

1. RPi 4 with Dual SATA Enclosure and built-in hardware RAID Controller. (Shown in Yellow areas in new Estimate attached.)
2. Compute Module 4 with I/O Board. (Shown in Green areas in new Estimate attached.)

TThe biggest problem with Pi based solutions is the availability of the Pi.

[TerryJC]

After yesterday's video conference I have uploaded an updated copy of the Requirements Specification to the WMT File server. The changes consist of the clarification of the work done on the existing device's software and the requirement regarding the weight and size of the replacement.

[PatrickW]

Another option for building a NAS is a PC Engines APU, which is an x86 single board computer. (These are distributed in the UK by LinITX.)

The main advantage I see with the APU is that the PC-like architecture should in principle make it possible to install arbitrary mainstream Linux distributions, with good prospects for the hardware being supported into the future. The installation process is a bit different than for a standard PC, though due to the use of coreboot and the need to perform the installation via a serial console instead of using a keyboard and monitor.

Compared to an old PC, it is more expensive, but smaller, silent (passively cooled) and uses less power. Compared to a new, off-the-shelf NAS, I think the cost is probably similar. Not sure how it would compare to an old laptop or a small-form-factor desktop PC.

There's only one SATA port on an APU board, but you can get a passive mSATA to SATA adapter to add another port, or a mini PCIe SATA controller to add multiple ports. Or, there is always USB.

Any custom APU case needs to meet or exceed the cooling performance of the standard case, so it can't just be a plastic box.

When I built what is effectively a NAS using one of their older ALIX boards, I just stuck some rubber feet on the standard case and stacked it on top of a similar-looking USB HDD enclosure, like Hi-Fi separates. The cables are a bit messy, but I thought it was neat enough to live in a cupboard:

DIYNAS.JPG (15.54 KiB) Viewed 200 times

Anyway, just an option. I expect it can be done more cheaply using a Raspberry Pi. Some of the other ARM SBCs do have SATA ports, but I tend to get the impression that the long-term (or even day 1) software support is often not as good as it is for Raspberry Pis.

[TerryJC]

Another option for building a NAS is a PC Engines APU, which is an x86 single board computer. (These are distributed in the UK by LinITX.)

Interesting. I'd never heard of these before. I can see the benefits in that they are designed to be servers and do that very well, and don't really do anything else.

Anyway, just an option. I expect it can be done more cheaply using a Raspberry Pi. Some of the other ARM SBCs do have SATA ports, but I tend to get the impression that the long-term (or even day 1) software support is often not as good as it is for Raspberry Pis.

From looking at the prices on https://linitx.com/ a new one would almost certainly be too expensive, especially if we also had to bu a SATA Adaptor. It may be doable if a used one were available, but as with obtaining a second-hand Pi 4, it would be a matter of luck that the right device became available.

[PatrickW]

From looking at the prices on https://linitx.com/ a new one would almost certainly be too expensive, especially if we also had to bu a SATA Adaptor.

I think my perception of the pricing is a bit skewed because I bought mine when it was already out-of-production and they were getting rid of old stock. I don't know how often that kind of deal comes up, but it looks like slim pickings at the moment. (The current cheapest [£168] model is not in stock, leaving only the most expensive one.)

A passive mSATA to SATA adaptor is only about £5 on eBay, which should suffice for a two-drive arrangement. The bigger costs would be for a PSU and a housing, as the standard PSU and housing only cater for the APU itself.

[hamishmb]

Looks like an interesting idea though - the ability to run a standard Linux distro might be useful. Thanks for sharing

[hamishmb]

Modern Debian can probably be run if we decide we want to do that now, though I have no idea how long Debian will support hardware this old (armv5 CPU, vs the 2012 Raspberry Pi 1's armv6 CPU, which was already largely unsupported in 2012). I would wager on it not being much longer, and it would likely be a bad experience anyway due to the poor hardware specifications.

Just noting that this is incorrect - Debian dropped support for armv4 and armv5 after Debian 9 "Stretch". Debian 9 is no longer supported so that's not really an option either any more.