ᐅ Planning the Network Cabinet and Its Contents

Thank you. 10W would be nice, I’ll have to look into that... The HP uses 25W when idle and the hard drives are sleeping.

Hey Alex,
why are you so critical of QNAP, Synology, and similar devices? Have you had bad experiences with them? I could understand that.

For example, I simply don’t feel like assembling the whole mess myself, installing the software, configuring it, and keeping it up to date. The extra free time is worth the additional cost to me. And honestly, I have never experienced a CPU bottleneck on my DS216j. For me, it would be a waste of resources to run a significantly more powerful CPU since I simply don’t have the applications for it.

It is undisputed that building your own system can be cheaper and you can have a custom-configured unit. But I like the consumer product for my purposes. My days of building my own PC are over, but I have no problem if others do it differently.

Alex85 schrieb:
Power consumption during normal operation is also around 30W. When the hard drive is idle and spins down, the CPU throttles accordingly, bringing it down to 10-15W. Runs 24/7. No, QNAP and others are not much better.

Actually, they are. What you consume in idle, my DS uses under load when everything is asleep, with power consumption somewhere around 7W – so about half.

Alex85 schrieb:
Low-end CPUs obviously use a bit less power, but that doesn’t make much difference and never, ever compensates for the higher upfront cost.

That may very well be true, but that’s not my argument anyway.

Alex85 schrieb:
But alright, that’s the difference between doing it yourself and buying ready-made. But when you see that alongside, people gather NUCs, Pis, and all sorts of things, I find that more than absurd. The thread title is ‘Planning the Network Cabinet,’ not ‘Putting Collected Boxes into a Cabinet.’ That is without a concept.

Then just rack the Pis like blades in a 19" rackmount, and suddenly it’s not without a concept because everything in the cabinet is neatly installed.

I can’t speak for others here, but for me, the Pis are at most hobby projects. The NUC is the central visualization and logic server and deliberately a dedicated device. Edomi requires a 64-bit architecture and CentOS. I consciously do NOT want to run that productively in a VM. From a CPU power perspective, a Pi would be sufficient, but it doesn’t run it due to the 64-bit requirement.

Whether it’s absurd or not may be a matter of taste and personal preference or hobby. For me, pragmatic solutions count in a single-family home – if there were three Pis at the bottom of the rack or two NUCs doing their job, that would be a pragmatic solution that solves my problem. Gold-plated faucets or (to me) excessive aesthetics are less important in the basement/technical room and would rank very low on my list. But not everyone has to see it that way, and that’s okay. Of course, I also like a super-clean network cabinet, no question, but that’s not my main goal.

ruppsn schrieb:
Hey Alex,
why are you so critical of QNAP, Synology, and similar brands? Have you had bad experiences with them? I could understand that.

As I mentioned, they are too expensive. Way too expensive.
The added value is definitely in the software. As I said above, you don’t actually need their hardware for that. It also works with your own hardware.
If you want, you can choose from a wide range of open source alternatives offering similar features to QNAP and Synology software—with no tinkering required.

ruppsn schrieb:
For example, I simply don’t feel like building all that stuff myself, setting up the software, configuring it, and keeping it up to date. The extra free time is worth the additional cost for me.

But you enjoy setting up and maintaining several Raspberry Pis instead?

ruppsn schrieb:
Yes, I do. What you consume at idle, my DS uses under load when everything is sleeping. Its power consumption is around 7W—so about half.

Undoubtedly, idle power consumption of smaller CPUs and optimized systems is better than in a custom build. However, mid-range NAS devices around 500€ often use Celeron J-series SoCs, which you can also buy and build yourself.
The difference between your system and mine is that I have four hard drives, you only have two. Each hard drive uses about 4W, and QNAP won’t change that. What matters is that the drives can spin down. If a camera is recording, spin-down usually doesn’t happen anymore, or I can dedicate one existing or an additional drive just for this purpose. You will either need to buy a new NAS because your case is full, or accept that both drives (I assume you have a RAID1 setup with two drives) won’t go into sleep mode anymore.

ruppsn schrieb:
Then mount the Pis like blades in a 19-inch rackmount, and it’s no longer unorganized because everything is neatly installed in the cabinet.

Tidying up is one thing. The solution should be flexible, and if I hear that tinkering and experimenting is a big part of it, then a custom-built system with virtualization is the smartest choice—it’s much more flexible than stacking individual little boxes. It’s also cheaper.

ruppsn schrieb:
I can’t speak for others here, for me the Pis are mostly hobby projects or tinkering. The NUC is the central visualization and logic server and deliberately a dedicated device. Edomi requires a 64-bit architecture and CentOS. I purposely don’t want to run that productively in a VM.

What’s wrong with running it in a VM?
CentOS is widely known and used everywhere—from hobby projects to data centers. 32-bit has basically been dead for about 10 years. What’s your concern here?

Here’s another perspective: Why have a (large) 19-inch rack if you’re just going to stack “desktop devices” on shelf trays inside? The 19-inch rack is then as useful as a 20€ Billy bookcase that would serve the same purpose. You can still mount patch panels and switches on 19-inch rails—but the rest would be better stored on shelves because it saves space and is usually cheaper.

Alex85 schrieb:
Keystone? For that price, you could just have an electrician do the work.

In my opinion, keystone modules only make sense when the socket types are inconsistent or when even the smallest patch panel would be significantly underpopulated.

Alex85 schrieb:
The thread title is "Planning the network cabinet," not "putting a bunch of boxes into a cabinet." That lacks a concept.

Alex85 schrieb:
Another perspective: Why use a (large) 19-inch cabinet if you’re just going to stack desktop devices on cable trays inside? The 19-inch cabinet becomes as useful as a $20 Billy shelf, which would serve the same purpose. You can still place a patch panel and switch on the 19-inch rack, but the rest is often better off in a shelf, because it saves space (and is cheaper as well).

I agree. Without any structure, it’s just a junk cabinet with a glass door; and if no attention is paid to grounding, the cabinet could just as well be made of wood. I often see that cable lengths aren’t considered when choosing the cabinet depth, and because the depth is too shallow, the doors won’t close properly—then a fan basically just stirs up dust. At that point, you might as well have a shelf. If the only thing in 19-inch format is the patch panel itself, then it can actually be mounted on the wall with mounting brackets just as well.

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/

Alex85 schrieb:
As I said, they are too expensive. Way too expensive.

Whether something is too expensive or not depends on the personal value you assign to it, right? It’s not too expensive for me because I feel I’m getting my money’s worth.

Alex85 schrieb:
The added value is definitely in the software. As mentioned before, you don’t actually need their hardware for that. It also works with your own hardware. Anyone interested can choose from a wide range of open-source alternatives offering similar functions to QNAP and Synology software. All without hassle.

Admittedly, I’m not familiar with “your” software yet, but I’m curious and will take a look at it soon. Maybe my opinion will change then. At the moment, I simply like the Synology solution very much. But we’ll see—nothing lasts forever.

Alex85 schrieb:
But setting up and maintaining a bunch of Pis is fun for you instead?

Well, what is there to maintain? Kodi, RPICam... dedicated tasks, dedicated solutions with relatively low maintenance effort. And yes, my hobbies generally bring me joy, including this one.

Alex85 schrieb:
The difference between your system and mine is that I have four hard drives, you only have two. One drive uses about 4W, and QNAP doesn’t change that.

I have a Synology, and so far I haven’t felt the need for more than two drives. I simply don’t need it, but that’s not something to generalize.

Alex85 schrieb:
When a camera records, it no longer works like that, or I can only use one of the existing or an additional drive for that purpose. You’re going to have to buy a new NAS...

My cameras are connected to an RPi running MotionEyeOS. One drive is attached there, and that’s enough. No need for a new NAS.

Alex85 schrieb:
The solution should be flexible, and if I hear you like to tinker and experiment, a custom-built box with virtualization is the smartest choice because it’s far more flexible than stacking single boxes. It’s cheaper too.

That’s a matter of taste and opinion.

Alex85 schrieb:
What’s wrong with running it in a VM?

Nothing. What makes a VM-based solution the only valid option? Exactly—nothing.
I’m a fan of dedicated hardware for dedicated tasks. I prefer not to run my home automation on the same hardware as other images. But you don’t have to see it that way.

Alex85 schrieb:
Another perspective: Why have a (large) 19” rack if you’re just going to stack “desktop devices” on the shelves?

Nobody was talking about that! This was about an RPi and an already existing NAS. I feel more comfortable with pragmatic solutions than dogmatic ones. So I have no problem putting a Pi in my 19” rack and placing my already existing NAS next to it.

For dogmatic reasons, throwing everything away and buying (or building) a 19” version to end up solving exactly the same problems is not my approach. But everyone is free to do as they please—I’m totally fine with that.

If you build everything from scratch and want to throw away what you already have (or don’t have anything), then sure, why not? No problem. But right now, I’d still probably go for the rackstation (a Synology in 19” format for a reasonable price and performance sufficient FOR ME)—for the reasons I mentioned. Because for ME it’s not too expensive but offers ME the value I expect. That’s it.

11ant schrieb:
I often notice that ...

Are you professionally involved in construction, or are you currently building yourself? I’m genuinely curious because you seem to have something to contribute on almost every topic—whether it’s IT, wall assemblies, floor plans, design, lighting, network technology, windows, flooring... and I always wonder where you get all that knowledge if you’re not active in the construction field.
Please don’t take this the wrong way; I’m not implying that you should hold back or anything like that. Definitely not meant in that way!