Is a SSD useless for 10 users?

Hi,
I would like to install Nextcloud but I don’t know if a SSD (only for system, data on a HDD) could be a good option or useless ? I can use a SSD + HDD or a SSHD.
I’ll install it on Ubuntu 16.04, Nginx and MariaDB. Max users will be about 10 and storage will be about 1 TB.
Is a SSHD should be sufficient ? Or the SSD is necessary ?
Thank you !

If you have the option, SSD is a better choice for running the system.

I think you can run Nextcloud just on a HDD. With enough RAM, the web-interface can cache many things and you can as well tune the database quite a bit. I’m not sure how much faster it will be for 10 users. For many write/read operations (but there is still the limit if data is on the hdd).

I have 4 GB RAM, do you think it’s sufficient ?
In all cases, data will be on the HDD. But I can use a SSHD (2 TB and 8 GB flash) if it can help.

Hi NicCO,

I think your question is not answer with yes or no.

4 GB RAM is enough to keep the server process in it.
You can use the HDD for storing your data and systemfiles with databases.
I think you will not have a difference between SSD + HDD od SSHD or SSD.
Because, don’t forget the relation to the access time and upload/download rate. In normal case the HDD or SSD is faster than your upload rate. Important is the management rate of the processor and the bus interface of memory.
If you have to use a SSHD via USB 2.0 on a Raspbien Pi3 then let it be :wink:. In any case, it is too slow for handling 10 or more users and its data on same time.
I think the only advantage for using an HDD + SSD is to secure your system or data in case of a system-chrash.
You have to weigh up.

  • In case of destroying each of the HDD or SSHD with all the data on it, you will lost all your files!
  • If you use two storages, you need more energy!
  • How often and how long all user have access on same time? Is it useful to improve the system in a milliseconds access range?
  • how fast is your internet connection?
  • is that a business or a privat server?

and so on…and so far…

Best reguards.

Hi,
Thank you for your response :slight_smile:
My config is an AMD Athlon 5350 + Asrock AM1H-ITX + 2 x 2GB DDR3 1600. I can use a SSHD for system + data and an other HDD to backup the first (RAID1 or other).
I’m the main user and I use it about 20 minutes a day. Others users access one time a week or a month so very rarely.
My Internet connection is 1Gbps down / 250Mbps up.
It’s a private server, not for business, only use to keep an access to my files from everywhere.

I am using an SSD for my system for several months. The data is stored on a hard disk. Backup is done with another disk twice a day via cronjob and rsync. No raid. I have about 10 users with Calendar, Mail, Gallery, News etc. and Collabora Online in use. Since the SSD, the overall system is much faster. I’m glad with the decision to use an SSD.

2 Likes

Thank you for your feedback :slight_smile:
I don’t use Calendar, Mail, Gallery, News and others, just Files, and others users too.
I think to try SSHD to store system + data, is there a benchmark to compare SSD and SSHD on Nextcloud ? Or is there a way to compare difference between both ?

There are not specific configuration tests (officially). Perhaps someone run some tests and published them on his blog or similar. Or you can find a different comparison with SSD vs. SSHD and try to figure out how this could affect Nextcloud. But so much depends on the configuration of the system and the load of the server, that you probably can only compare very specific situations. If you did comparisons, it would be interesting to share them :wink:

Have you configured the SSD for caching? Or is just the system on that disk?

I am thinking to keep my HDD a bit healthier by caching via the SSD. Only if necessary the system should access the HDD (I guess this might happen once a day).

The system, Debian 10 runs on a Samsung 860 Evo SSD. The Nextcloud data I have stored on a WD Red hard drive. The system runs 24/7 so it is always available.