OneCD wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 1:48 am
QNAP are unable to support every combination of hardware, and so will look for the first piece of unsupported hardware installed in a NAS and blame it for the problems present. This is not uncommon in tech-support.
Agreed, not uncommon, but still zero f's seem to have been given.
The tech support person was kind and professional, nothing to complain there.
But the provided information and the support process was just sad and sure didn't feel like much effort was made to help.
Initially I was, rightfully, asked to check if the RAM was faulty, and given a link to a company-website, where an outdated tutorial described how to use Memtest.
Funnily enough the indicated Memtest version didn't work on the NAS, or my Workstation for that matter, as it was apparently outdated and didn't support UEFI.
After solving this issue and providing test results on my own (using another, updated Memtest version), the only response I got was essentially one sentence, practically unrelated and devoid of any interest in solving the issue.
The "It ain't the NAS, try with the drives" part almost made me laugh. The QNAP software is so unbelievably bug ridden that I sure would expect it to be the cause of most RAM related issues, but let's blame something quite unrelated instead. They didn't even provide some related log entries that might explain why they blame the drives, probably because there were none to be found. I sure can live with the fact that they don't support HGST drives, it's the very low effort I didn't like.
OneCD wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 1:48 am
Which is quite a cheap "server". A real server costs many times that. QNAP are budget NAS (even the expensive ones). Apples-and-oranges.
I disagree, it's more than a valid comparison, as everything is defined by what it does and/or is supposed to be created for.
This NAS uses server-grade hardware, has a price double that of
these "real" Fujitsu servers I was admin for at my previous company and QNAP itself advertises this as a server-grade product.
QNAP wrote:
... helping your business achieve reliable service-level agreement performance, from creative workflows to file server, virtualization server, ...
Still, the performance of the web front-end doesn't even compare to a 150€ phone when browsing folders, just ridiculous.
OneCD wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 1:48 am
Was the NAS doing anything else at the time? Media indexing? Transcoding? RAID scrubbing? etc...
No, nothing.