redunanant controller setup is a cool detail they added. The zfS part is at the bottom of the link:
QNAP at CES: A M.2 SSD NAS, Dual-Xeon ZFS NAS and More
QNAP at CES: A M.2 SSD NAS, Dual-Xeon ZFS NAS and More
ZFS going mainstream @ CES
- Thread starter gigatexal
- Start date
Notice: Page may contain affiliate links for which we may earn a small commission through services like Amazon Affiliates or Skimlinks.
We have one of the 2U E3-1200 systems in the Sunnyvale datacenter lab. Should have our first QNAP review out later this month.
It is interesting that they swapped to FreeBSD for ZFS rather than using ZoL. It means they saw something that made them fork which distribution they were using.
It is interesting that they swapped to FreeBSD for ZFS rather than using ZoL. It means they saw something that made them fork which distribution they were using.
I'd be curious to see if they recompiled the FBSD install to take out everything but what they need to run their hardware. Not entirely necessary but cool none-the-less to leave the smallest footprint. Though, as far as features go, I'm not sure who is keeping up the Oracle distributions best.
I suppose it is the natural evolution of the product. It's curious though that QNAP chose ZFS over BTRFS. I'm guessing that they feel it's simply not near ready enough to be reliable for their application. Either way, those all look like very expensive solutions when compared to the average whitebox. I'll be interested in reading @Patrick review 
I have a QNAP NAS at home, I can happily and easily say that from the support experiences (not knowing their own product) I've had and the QNAP presence on their forums (refusing to update software even with massive vulnerabilities while refusing to accept that those vulnerabilities exist), they have no clue what they're doing and won't know how to support it either.
There's a very good reason I steer people towards Synology over QNAP at every chance I get. The hardware looks good, but there's no way on earth I'd recommend them to anybody, especially business environments.
There's a very good reason I steer people towards Synology over QNAP at every chance I get. The hardware looks good, but there's no way on earth I'd recommend them to anybody, especially business environments.
I attended 2015/12/16 Qnap ZFS server introduction event.... I was pretty disappointed and following points are what I have learned during and after event talking to Qnap Product Manager
1. It does not support NVMe SSD
2. It does not support Infiniband even though they use Mellanox IC
3. It uses none-standard type of addon card bracket (Qnap only)
4. They have their own version of remote ZFS Send/Recv, which takes out user authentication altogether, I am not sure that should be the way.
5. Very Pricey! US$ 4,500 and up without HD, RAM & CPU
It is more like a FreeNAS in Qnap Brand type of product
1. It does not support NVMe SSD
2. It does not support Infiniband even though they use Mellanox IC
3. It uses none-standard type of addon card bracket (Qnap only)
4. They have their own version of remote ZFS Send/Recv, which takes out user authentication altogether, I am not sure that should be the way.
5. Very Pricey! US$ 4,500 and up without HD, RAM & CPU
It is more like a FreeNAS in Qnap Brand type of product
Last edited:
I believe they choose freeBSD due on current 4.4 BSD licenese (used by freeBSD)
4. The Current State of FreeBSD and BSD Licenses
The so-called new BSD license applied to FreeBSD within the last few years is effectively a statement that you can do anything with the program or its source, but you do not have any warranty and none of the authors has any liability (basically, you cannot sue anybody). This new BSD license is intended to encourage product commercialization. Any BSD code can be sold or included in proprietary products without any restrictions on the availability of your code or your future behavior.
Do not confuse the new BSD license with “public domain”. While an item in the public domain is also free for all to use, it has no owner.
the detail is Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project
they can do everything, and keep the changes for them self
, and locks user/customers to rely on their only services.this is their current concern with their linux product that need to release basic source codes and the changes, unless they can keep the source code as long as built for scratch to up...
I doubtly they will strip down much the kernal and filesystem. Basically they lock down the system and they will ask $$ for supports and locked the door for everyone to improve or make "clone"
the big success on forking is Xpenology
.I would suggest to get Synology than qnap on my objective license concern..
That all makes me very sad about the state of their support the M2 nas was a very interesting looking device and was on the list of things to examine for a video production company I support
didn't know that about the license. They could have done so much more with just jails and a vanilla BSD install. Oh wellI believe they choose freeBSD due on current 4.4 BSD licenese (used by freeBSD)
4. The Current State of FreeBSD and BSD Licenses
The so-called new BSD license applied to FreeBSD within the last few years is effectively a statement that you can do anything with the program or its source, but you do not have any warranty and none of the authors has any liability (basically, you cannot sue anybody). This new BSD license is intended to encourage product commercialization. Any BSD code can be sold or included in proprietary products without any restrictions on the availability of your code or your future behavior.
Do not confuse the new BSD license with “public domain”. While an item in the public domain is also free for all to use, it has no owner.
the detail is Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project
they can do everything, and keep the changes for them self
this is their current concern with their linux product that need to release basic source codes and the changes, unless they can keep the source code as long as built for scratch to up...
I doubtly they will strip down much the kernal and filesystem. Basically they lock down the system and they will ask $$ for supports and locked the door for everyone to improve or make "clone"
the big success on forking is Xpenology
I would suggest to get Synology than qnap on my objective license concern..
They can modified and make any changes without giving back to community due on freebsd license...
Is all about pure money maker in mind ha-ha....
eh well without such permissiveness in the license it's likely how MS used the TCP stack in early windows