Ubiquiti: Enterprise NAS, Built on ZFS

(blog.ui.com)

78 points | by ksec 1 hour ago

15 comments

  • elevation 22 minutes ago
    I'm glad to see UBNT in this space.

    I've always used ZFS because it's vastly superior to other options. When I see storage companies building without fault tolerance, or without a merkle tree (so that you can backup deltas efficiently without having to recompute them) it's a sign their marketing team has more influence over the company than their engineers.

    Sadly, the few ZFS COTS options have been somewhat underpowered. QNAP supports ZFS filesystems, but their backup configuration won't let you arrange for a nas to pull from the source (instead of the source doing a push.) You can still pull it off by scheduling your own cron job, but this somewhat defeats the purpose of paying extra for a vendor solution.

    UBNT is still supporting my 15 year old edgerouters with security updates, and their interface is clean and usable for anyone with basic network experience. And their video surveillance solutions are unusual in that they allow you to keep your footage entirely onsite and offline, an uncommon level of privacy. If they can bring the same polish to their storage solutions, I'll be using these new products for a long time.

    • sussexby 5 minutes ago
      The same is true for our AI processing on the cameras. This is entirely local and private. You can even air gap the UniFi Protect system from the Internet and it'll operate fine.
  • exabrial 1 hour ago
    Ubiquiti's biggest feature is no monthly recurring cost. I really hope they continue the streak on products like this. Seems like anything else bought up these days is switched to an MRR model with no vision into the long term viability.
    • DataDynamo 57 minutes ago
      *yet

      They will at some point just cash out.

      • revnode 34 minutes ago
        They've been at this for a while. They do have offerings you subscribe for and pay monthly. They have also consistently offered an option for each of those offerings to bring your own or self host. They've earned my trust.
        • roamerz 0 minutes ago
          >>they’ve earned my trust

          Boy I hope Broadcom didn’t hear that…

        • softfalcon 9 minutes ago
          I tend to agree with you.

          In my opinion, as long as the majority of their profits come from people continuing to buy the self-host devices, it is fairly unlikely they'll ever stop offering those devices. Why change a working business model?

          Yes, subscription models are enticing for that recurring revenue... number must go up, right? /s

          If a majority of your sales are not in subscription products though, I think it would be foolish for a business to blow off its own leg trying to chase that particular dragon.

          Then again... businesses have made dumber calls in the past out of nowhere...

    • qurren 24 minutes ago
      I just wish they would put better processors in their stuff. Is this yet another NAS powered by an ARM Cortex?
      • softfalcon 14 minutes ago
        I have heard others say the same as you about Ubiquiti devices. I genuinely curious what bottlenecks you've hit.

        I've only been using Ubiquiti as a pro-sumer, but it has held up well for my use case of Plex and little game servers.

        I use a Synology NAS for my storage though, which is a slightly beefier mobile AMD chipset.

        I'd be very interested to know what I should and shouldn't expect from my ARM based network stack though!

        • qurren 0 minutes ago
          > I genuinely curious what bottlenecks you've hit.

          1. My UDM Pro absolutely chokes and stalls with intrusion detection enabled on the firewall and 8 cameras connected

          2. The UNAS 8 I don't own but I believe it would struggle with >1Gbps links and encryption enabled.

      • hannesfur 17 minutes ago
        It says 8 Arm Neoverse N2 cores in the blog post. So not directly ARM Cortex, derived from ARM Cortex-X3 but same family as NVIDIA Grace, Google Axion and AWS Graviton4.
      • sussexby 7 minutes ago
        It's based on Neoverse N2 which in our other platforms (e.g., ENVR Core, UDM Beast, EF Core) has contributed to vast improvements in performance versus ARM Cortex.
  • bhouston 10 minutes ago
    > "Dual 25 Gigabit SFP28 ports and redundant power supplies for resilience"

    Can you actually saturate the links with the spinning drives?

    I've had the hardest time making my TrueNAS ZFS server fast when it was filled with HDD spinning disks. I initially also had 12 of them trying to get maximum speed. I have 128GB RAM and a 10G ethernet connection. I tried all types of optimizations like L2ARC via NVMe, etc, and it wasn't very effective and just too much time spent tweaking and testing.

    Instead I just threw up my hands and replaced all the spinning disks with NVMe drives for the data I actually shared (8x 4TB NVMe drives.) And now it very usable and no need for LRArc, etc. Random or streaming access is equally fast.

    Best choice I made. Now I did do this over a year ago so I skipped the NVMe price inflation.

    I still keep 4 spinning disks but it is for archival data that I expect to never access unless something bad happens. It is slow and I use it like a tape drive.

  • bakies 4 minutes ago
    I really want a object store in my storage appliance :(

    Would be nice to have a CSI, but I can probably just use democratic-csi like I already do on my homemade ZFS based storage appliance.

  • topspin 32 minutes ago
    Is this some xBSD or UniFi OS (debian) with ZFSoL? Can't tell from what they've written. 8C+64GB: enough for essential block+file service, but not for dedup and other demanding ZFS features. Also, doesn't appear the controller is redundant; just the power supplies. iSCSI is headlined; nice they didn't limit this to file. No mention of object store, or NVMe-oF.

    Seems like a nice, basic, affordable platform for workgroup/SME stuff. Not NetApp/Pure Storage "enterprise" grade though.

    • nyrikki 2 minutes ago
      They seem to follow the anti-corruption layer model for most of their offerings, so I would expect they use what ever OS is best supported by the upstream.

      It is a large reason they can mitigate vendor risk IMHO, offering different tiers of switches as an example without being held hostage by on particular switch IC vendor like many brands.

      I do wish someone would take up comstar though, netapp bought and killed several jbod lines etc… to kill it before Oracle bought Sun and also killed it to protect their enterprise storage offerings.

      NVMe-oF may be a possibility because there are FPGA IP vendors but without comstar there are some challenges IMHO.

    • BadBadJellyBean 24 minutes ago
      Could be Linux as well since ZFS on Linux is pretty good now. It would fit in with their other devices which are also Linux based AFAIK.
  • kyrra 41 minutes ago
    • mpeg 23 minutes ago
      That seems reasonable, I don't buy NAS for datacenters (just run a modest 80tb one for my home lab) but equivalent rackmount 16-bay ones from other vendors would be more expensive (maybe $5k-6k?) and with less polish.
    • toomuchtodo 16 minutes ago
      Pays for itself in ~40 months of not paying $100/month for streaming services.
  • SideburnsOfDoom 42 minutes ago
    > with ... no firmware restrictions on drive models, organizations can scale capacity without being restricted by proprietary hardware ecosystems.

    This looks like a dig at Synology, who do this.

  • tristor 1 hour ago
    I am highly interested in this, especially if it works well with Time Machine to do backups over the network. I've got a fully 10GbE + WiFi 7 network w/ Ubiquiti gear already, would love to ditch my janky DIY NAS setup for something that is integrated with the rest and could potentially give me a better backup setup for my photography as well as enough storage to act as a media server.
    • varenc 48 minutes ago
      I have a UNAS-Pro, which runs the same Unifi Drive software as this, and it works great for Time Machine backups. Dead simple.

      I also have tons of other Ubiquiti gear, and honestly there's not a ton of synergy between the NAS and everything else. It's a great NAS though. And also, it's only a NAS. It's not an application server like a Synology NAS.

    • fragmede 51 minutes ago
      Wireless Time Machine backup works until one day, Time Machine decides to shit the bed. Do not trust it. Invest in a different backup solution if your data is at all important to you. Something like Arq or Backblaze or tarsnap.
      • tristor 47 minutes ago
        I use the 3-2-1 strategy for backups. I keep one copy off-site by using cloud backups, currently I primarily use Backblaze for that purpose but am considering alternatives for several reasons. I keep a second copy on an external SSD via Time Machine, and I keep one copy on-device. I'd like to use network Time Machine to get rid of the inconvenience of having a bunch of USB external SSDs floating around, especially since none of them are large enough to backup my entire drive if I get close to filling it.

        I appreciate the perspective, I definitely take backups seriously for my photography.

        • oarsinsync 21 minutes ago
          I think a combination of:

          1/ ZFS datasets with hourly (or daily) snapshots

          2/ Samba with vfs_fruit

          Gives the peace of mind that even when the sparsebundle shits the bed, you can rollback to a suitable snapshot and only lose a small period of backups, rather than having to lose the entire history and start again from scratch.

          (I say when, not if, through considerable experience over the last 15 years that it will always, inevitably, shit the bed.)

  • evanjrowley 1 hour ago
    I've never been a fan of Ubiquiti's proprietary solutions, but this might actually be one product that I can be enthusiastic about.
    • MiracleRabbit 45 minutes ago
      They are getting better.

      After a long time they introduced ONVIF into their camera products which basically opened it to everyone.

    • cassianoleal 48 minutes ago
      I've recently been convinced to implement a Unifi stack for my home network. I got a Cloud Gateway, a 10G switch and a couple WiFi APs.

      The Cloud Gateway will be sold or given away. It's utter crap. I'm now building an OpenWRT container on IncusOS as my Internet gateway/router.

      The switch is meh. It's easy to admin, which is nice - though I'm having to run UnifiOS on another container on said IncusOS.

      The APs are fine. Decent power and the central administration with the switch is actually quite nice.

      If I knew everything I know now, I wouldn't have bought any of those but they will do for now.

      • mohaine 38 minutes ago
        I love by Dream Machine Pro. Seems to just work and keep everything up to date. I have it running my security cameras as well and it has been pretty much bullet proof.

        What needs do you have for a router that the Cloud Gateway is missing or is bad at? A PiHole equivalent is about all I can think I'm missing.

        • cassianoleal 31 minutes ago
          IPv6 support is basic at best. The zone-based firewall is very prescriptive and limited. ACL stuff is not great. To increase the MTU of the physical interface connected to the ISP I would need to hack a systemd unit that did it on boot (I either need it at 1508 so the PPPoE interface uses 1500, or I need to MSS clamp it and have it effectively reduced to 1492). Initial configuration requires the device to be connected to the Internet.

          There were a few other niggles, and in the end I just found it easier to do what I need on OpenWRT.

          • m-s-y 10 minutes ago
            just genuinely curious about your MTU use case and why this is required...?
        • SparkyMcUnicorn 31 minutes ago
          I really like the DM Pro and have it deployed to an office of about 50 people. It's a pretty no-fuss solution and fairly simple to manage.

          For my personal setup, I decided to go with OPNSense and I couldn't be happier. Much more control, at the cost of being a little more hands on.

          I think the best (rough) comparison here is MacOS vs Linux (or more accurately in this case, FreeBSD).

      • mpeg 8 minutes ago
        I went with eero and really wish I'd gone with unifi

        Apart from the shitty software and basic features either missing or locked behind a monthly cost, the network itself is not bad at all, I get 600-700mbps on wifi throughout the house and have my servers wired on 2.5gbe

        But the one thing I really thought I was buying into by choosing an amazon brand was ease when it came to buying upgrades, and yet I ended up having to buy extra hardware (like the wired gateway) from ebay and sellers in the US as amazon does not sell their own hardware everywhere

      • threecheese 31 minutes ago
        What were your constraints and how were they not met? Looking to buy the same, Dream Machine specifically.
      • robinvdvleuten 39 minutes ago
        What do you know now then?
        • cassianoleal 31 minutes ago
          See the answer I gave to the sibling comment.
  • speed_spread 28 minutes ago
    I'm reminded of the Sun Fire X4500 "Thumper" for which ZFS was originally developed. 48 SATA drives packed in a slide-out rack: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zQ5RLAyA7w
  • AceJohnny2 48 minutes ago
    [dead]
  • hexajon 34 minutes ago
    [dead]
  • annoyingnoob 57 minutes ago
    Looks interesting, but likely lacks FIPS support which makes it an issue for companies that work with the government.
  • swrobel 1 hour ago
    Did we decide ZFS is good after all this time?
    • AdmiralAsshat 1 hour ago
      Who said it was bad? I thought we were all pretty much in agreement that it was good, and the only thing holding it back from wider adoption into e.g. the Linux kernel was the poison-pill of Oracle's ownership and licensing.
      • natebc 56 minutes ago
        another thing holding it back is the threat of a lawsuit from Netapp.

        source: used to work for a storage vendor that was marketing a NAS based on ZFS and got credible threats from Netapp to the point that we sought a partnership with Oracle that included indemnification under Oracles settlement with Netapp.

        • throw0101c 43 minutes ago
          Oracle and NetApp 'mutually dismissed' in 2010:

          * https://www.theregister.com/off-prem/2010/09/09/oracle-and-n...

          * https://www.computerworld.com/article/1585889/opinion-patent...

          NetApp originally sued then-independent Sun in 2007, and Sun counter-sued.

          Free/TrueNAS/iXsystems has been offering ZFS-based solutions for many years now, and I haven't heard NetApp going after them:

          * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrueNAS

          * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IXsystems

          • natebc 26 minutes ago
            I remember all this too. The time period that I was in this scene was AFTER 2010 though so who knows. As mentioned in response to the sibling "credible sources" bro, I was just a lowly support engineer so i had to trust that the CEO wasn't lying to us about all this.

            Maybe he was ... they do that sometimes.

            I looked around a little. the C&D from Netapp was in ~July 2010 and the partnership and product with Oracle in the Fall (Around the cease fire) and we continued with that (via the Oracle Partnership) through 2011-2015 when the company ran out of cash and laid us all off.

        • smartbit 45 minutes ago
          only threats, no court cases or journalist writing about ZFS indemnification? IOW please provide links to credible sources.
          • natebc 28 minutes ago
            sorry, don't have a link to the CEO telling us that we were signing a partnership with oracle that included the indemnification.

            I was just a lowly support engineer so not privy to all the legal details that the executives were dealing with. I too had to just take them at their word.

            ETA: I searched a bit. Here's a link

            https://www.enterprisestorageforum.com/networking/netapp-thr...

            Maybe threats were enough? I certainly wouldn't want to test it myself.