I need a cloud storage option for potentially 10TB of data.

[thecomputerguy]

I have a client that I currently have setup with a Synology NAS (20TB) and it has been working fine.

They currently use about 5TB but they want the buffer of a total of 10TB for growth. They VPN into the network and access the NAS. They also use a Synology app that lets them access the data from their phones.

The issue is that their office is very prone to power outages especially during fire season, and their office is very prone to internet outages.

They asked me to put together a battery system to keep their network online for 2-4 days during a power outage WITHOUT using a gas generator. I told them that I didn't think that was possible considering all of the networking equipment they have. Modem, Gateway, Firewall, 48P Switch, Several AP's etc (and the NAS).

I currently have this out there: CyberPower PR1500LCD Smart App Sinewave UPS System

But that isn't a 2-4 day UPS especially with the NAS

Their computers/NAS are all about 5 years old so were trying to put together a plan for 2026 for a full replacement of about 20 systems which will all be Laptops/Docks now instead of Desktops due to the above issues.

I mentioned we could go cloud storage and that would alleviate the power outage issue but the are unwilling to trim their 5TB of data (Word, Excel, PDF, Pictures). Literally not an option.

SharePoint currently has 1.5TB of available storage, so upgrading that to 10TB would be absurdly expensive. They went with a NAS due to the cost of cloud storage 5 years ago saying "We could buy this NAS for $7k or pay $1500-$2000 a month for SharePoint storage".

Cant really argue that, they aren't cheap but the math don't math... possible $100k-$120k over 5 years AND ... that much data in sharepoint sounds NASTY.

So they want a comparison of some cloud storage service vs. another NAS ... the NAS will always be cheaper but will die during power outages.

Maybe just go with another NAS and have two dedicated LARGE UPS's one just for the NAS and one for the Modem/Gateway?

 

[timeshifter]

Can you put the NAS in a data center or colocation facility? Or replicate the one they have to another NAS that's colocated?

 

[trevm999]

You could look into Azure Files. You could use a Windows Server as a local hot cache and then maybe you wouldn't need to provision Azure Files as heavily for performance, depending on what they're doing.

I can't say I've used Azure Files much though, because I'm on the app side of things and blob storage is always cheaper.

 

[Metanis]

Can you put the NAS in a data center or colocation facility? Or replicate the one they have to another NAS that's colocated?

I really like the colocation concept with a data replication strategy. In theory you could build your own if the bandwidth is there. And the disaster recovery angle would be great.

Alternately, if a concerted effort was made to change the local infrastructure to maximal energy efficient components AND some Tesla Powerwall's were implemented, then days of backup power might be achievable. Throw in some solar arrays for recharging and it could be a sweet solution. A sharp CPA could probably find a way to write most of it off too. And the client can advertise they're "Green"!

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

I'd look into AzureFiles too..."cold storage blob" tier for older stuff...if they are just keeping old stuff around as archives, and then current stuff in Teams/SP.

 

[thecomputerguy]

Can you put the NAS in a data center or colocation facility? Or replicate the one they have to another NAS that's colocated?

My only wonder is how they would access the data then at that point? Is it common that data storage centers allow for VPN connectivity?

On second thought, I don't think there is any chance they would go for this.

 

[thecomputerguy]

I really like the colocation concept with a data replication strategy. In theory you could build your own if the bandwidth is there. And the disaster recovery angle would be great.

Alternately, if a concerted effort was made to change the local infrastructure to maximal energy efficient components AND some Tesla Powerwall's were implemented, then days of backup power might be achievable. Throw in some solar arrays for recharging and it could be a sweet solution. A sharp CPA could probably find a way to write most of it off too. And the client can advertise they're "Green"!

They have a very large office in a very large building. That would be a lot of permitting and building management stuff to deal with. I can't imagine how expensive that would be... probably $100k?

 

[thecomputerguy]

I'd look into AzureFiles too..."cold storage blob" tier for older stuff...if they are just keeping old stuff around as archives, and then current stuff in Teams/SP.

The only issue here is I explicitly asked the question if they were willing to store old data elsewhere to minimize their hot storage and they said did not want to allocate someone to that task (because how am I supposed to know what they want and don't want) AND the C suite boys like to have immediate access to old data to reference new projects ... even as far back as 10-15 years ago.

Cutting up the data isn't an option. The C suites boys are in their 70's ... they are more of a Z drive type of crew.

 

[thecomputerguy]

Honestly I think I'm going to just tell them that when the power goes out to take the server somewhere else and plug it in and we'll figure it out from there.

Then I'll set their NAS up with DDNS ... open ports will be an issue but I can figure that problem out later. Hell they can even just bring me the NAS and I'll plug it in at my Office.

LOL

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

 

[Metanis]

They have a very large office in a very large building. That would be a lot of permitting and building management stuff to deal with. I can't imagine how expensive that would be... probably $100k?

I assume a Tesla PowerWall would require an electrical contractor and probably a permit. They are expandable so you'd just connect as many units as they want to pay for days of backup. Some quick Internet sleuthing revealed you're probably looking at $15k per day. And the PowerWall is not instant changeover so you would still need your UPS between the PowerWall and the load. I would assume they would just skip the solar panels and just use normal line power to keep the PowerWall charged.

My son had a large house in Florida and got a quote of $100k to keep his house 100% off the grid using PowerWalls, I don't think your application would require anything close to that.

 

[thecomputerguy]

View attachment 17969

I kinda laughed at this but ... is this a possible serious solution?

 

[timeshifter]

I kinda laughed at this but ... is this a possible serious solution?

And your opening post, you said a gas generator wasn’t an option. That is a gas generator, although it’s powered by natural gas in my area,

 

[britechguy]

I can no longer resist. Where on earth is this business located (and that's all I want to know, city and state [or analogous equivalent]).

I was thinking somewhere in CA based on the "fire season" comment but there are not many parts of CA where internet outages are at all frequent (unless they're part of a natural disaster).

If I were fearing, in any way, destruction of work premises the last thing I'd want is an on-prem solution. I'd rather invest in more robust backup internet access (e.g. Starlink, if needed in case of emergency) and putting everything in the cloud, as far away from the path of potential destruction as possible.

 

[Markverhyden]

I kinda laughed at this but ... is this a possible serious solution?

You'll see natural gas gen sets almost exclusively in residential settings. It works as along as the gas flows. Virtually all commercial space that has a backup gen set uses diesel. The tanks look like they're around 250 gallons and should be, Consumption is almost entirely based on load. Now if you're in certain parts of the country natural is wide spread so should have pipe to commercial buildings.

But I have to ask what do they do? There's very few businesses that truly need 24 x 7 or something really close to it. There's a big difference between that'd be really neat to have so we can keep running vs people will die or really suffer if we aren't running.

 

[thecomputerguy]

I can no longer resist. Where on earth is this business located (and that's all I want to know, city and state [or analogous equivalent]).

I was thinking somewhere in CA based on the "fire season" comment but there are not many parts of CA where internet outages are at all frequent (unless they're part of a natural disaster).

If I were fearing, in any way, destruction of work premises the last thing I'd want is an on-prem solution. I'd rather invest in more robust backup internet access (e.g. Starlink, if needed in case of emergency) and putting everything in the cloud, as far away from the path of potential destruction as possible.

California ... Last year they were down in total for a couple of weeks throughout the year due to internet outages/infrastructure issues. They even asked if they could replace their primary internet with Starlink to which I said no. There is no other provider in their area.

In those couple of weeks they were down due to mandatory evacuations. Last year was a bad year with fires and infrastructure issues with them.

 

[britechguy]

In those couple of weeks they were down due to mandatory evacuations. Last year was a bad year with fires and infrastructure issues with them.

Is there a serious belief (and there may be) that they could just do a pop-up version of their business if under evacuations?

The fact is that one has to do a cost benefit analysis of the frequency of disruptions like this and the costs to mitigate them rather than just accepting that "these things can happen, and they happen so seldom at this scale that the amount of money needed to work around them is not reasonable."

Were this me, I'd be in the latter camp. When things like last year's fire season happen there is no way in hell (almost literally, based on what happened) that any prior planning will keep you up and running or, even, back in business in short order. When entire communities are wiped from the surface of the earth, even if you could be up and running in 24 hours if there's no one around that uses your services what good does it do?

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

They even asked if they could replace their primary internet with Starlink to which I said no. There is no other provider in their area.

I'm curious....why did you advise "no" to Starlink?
I've set up quite a few of them....for businesses also. I like to have...basic broadband also as a failover....with Starlink as the primary...and we use Unifi for the gateway (and switches and APs too of course). Bridging the Starlink gateway.

Typical performance, upper 200 megs down, approx 20 megs up, latency from 16-20ms with the newer, faster, lower latency Gen3 Starlink routers. Even a few years ago the older Gen1 routers...would give above 200 megs down, still 20 megs up, and around 25-35ms.

I have some businesses running on it that can have over 40-50 client devices on....and it works very well.

 

[thecomputerguy]

I'm curious....why did you advise "no" to Starlink?
I've set up quite a few of them....for businesses also. I like to have...basic broadband also as a failover....with Starlink as the primary...and we use Unifi for the gateway (and switches and APs too of course). Bridging the Starlink gateway.

Typical performance, upper 200 megs down, approx 20 megs up, latency from 16-20ms with the newer, faster, lower latency Gen3 Starlink routers. Even a few years ago the older Gen1 routers...would give above 200 megs down, still 20 megs up, and around 25-35ms.

I have some businesses running on it that can have over 40-50 client devices on....and it works very well.

I've just always been under the understanding that underground infrastructure is superior to air.

Maybe I need to budge a little on that.

 

[Sky-Knight]

I've just always been under the understanding that underground infrastructure is superior to air.

Maybe I need to budge a little on that.

Starlink has goofy NAT to work with, but if all you need is Internet connectivity it works really well. If you don't trust it as a primary, then make it the backup.