All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Praise for NetDynamics (storage)
I thought I'd share some thoughts about this service in case it may help others choose.
I have been using @NetDynamics24 storage in the Netherlands for Borg backups for a little while and I have been impressed with the performance and the stability since day 1. I am now using rsync.net as secondary destination (Zurich location) for Borg backups and the difference in speed is noticeable, with NetDynamics being much faster than rsync.net for me, despite being quite a bit cheaper.
Backups, prune, check tasks, everything is much faster with NetDynamics. Very happy with the service so far and highly recommended.
With exactly the same data backend up and number of archives with the same frequency, Borg takes less than half of the time checking the consistency of the repository and of the archives with NetDynamics compared to rsync.net. I think it's quite impressive considering that I pay 60 euros per year for 1 TB with ND while the same amount of storage costs me $96/yr with rsync.net (and that's the special pricing "for experts", with zfs snapshots disabled etc).
Comments
Much appreciate your feedback.
I would like by the way to mention that our NL location is the faster (read/write) because it is on software RAID-0. Of course, we all know the risks with it.
All of our other locations are on Hardware RAID-6 which doesn't mean they are slow. All of our clients enjoy decent speeds of speed and write.
Once again, thank you for your review and hopefully more people write reviews about their experience with their providers.
Oh, so there is no redundancy in NL? Thanks for the transparency but I am surprised
Yes, the raid config is clearly stated for each location in our page:
https://netdynamics24.com/backup-services.php
Time to switch again
I don't know what to say really.... I opened this thread to praise the service and now... wow.
So you revoke your praise?
It doesn't mean our service is not decent. We use enterprise disks and never had any failure.
RAID 0 is okay for cheap backups
You just need to have several copies in several locations.
This is also preferable with RAID 1 / RAID 6 so... why not
With the same honesty with which I have opened the thread, I can say that I'd never have stored my backups there if I had noticed that it was a RAID-0 storage with no redundancy.
We can migrate your account to any of our other locations with RAID -6 if you want.
I'll think about it
They have 0 integration with the panel for password resets. Unless they’ve fixed it now. Varied services across servers etc. I honestly can’t remember all the red flags but I hoped the hell out really quickly. It all seems extremely bootstrapped.
I think one of the big issues was they store passwords in plaintext. How do I know this? I had two services with them. One I had bought years ago and was tied to another email. When I bought another one I accidentally signed up with a new email. I wasn’t able to ftp using new credentials for some odd reason. We went back and forth troubleshooting. And then out of nowhere I received my username and password from the other account in the ticket which I had completely forgotten it existed.
This was a while ago so not sure if things have changed.
@Astro said:
Our services have been improved a lot since then.
Glad to hear that!
I have 500GB NL with them, it's $40 for 3 years (double discount maybe from BF i can't remember) and it's great for just personal backup.
but finding out it uses Raid 0 is surprising
Yeah, quite surprising. Even if it’s for personal backups I still have a lot of very important data like documents, source code and photos, so I don’t want to risk not being able to restore from backups or losing off site backups altogether which would be tragic if something happened to my home like a fire etc. and I couldn’t use local backups.
Incidentally I tried a test restore of all my data with Borg using both NetDynamics and rsync.net and I couldn’t figure out why extracting an archive is excruciatingly slow with both, so it doesn’t seem a problem with the storage.
Backing up is super fast, but restoring more than just a few files takes ages. I got fed up with this, plus the surprise of the raid 0 thing, so I just reactivated my accounts with both Backblaze and iDrive and am now using their backup tools again for personal stuff. It’s a bit more expensive but they are in the backup business so they should be safer.
That sounds quite concerning too…
my FI backup node never failed me with NetDynamics24
will renew it
and in next BF maybe I'll get the de
NetDynamics24 support was fast for me... he also installed mc... he is the dude.
u r unfaithful to me ??
Anything can happen with any provider and any kind of redundancy. If you have important data, you should back it up in two different places in any case. And anyway, you lose your data if something happens to your house AND the RAID 0 fails at the same time (AND you don't have a 2nd backup), which is statistically kind of a very remote possibility.
Wow, RAID0 in production.
Unsure whether I've seen this before.
Are there any other LET providers, who also offer RAID0?
It's supposed to be for backups. Plus it's clearly mentioned on the order page. Plus if one really cares about the data one would have redundancy with other providers.
Are you saying anything other than raid 0 is completely perfect? No. You may get a small breather but that's all. At the end multiple disks in the array can fail at the same time
Hi,
never saw a praise that backfired so hard
But to the topic:
@NetDynamics24 is to be praise to be transparent here in this thread ( knowing that this info would most probably not find too much fans )
Offering Raid 0 in commercial hosting is quiet
hot 
I mean even if a drive is announcing through SMART that its going to die, you cant do anything but to copy all data from the whole array to another array and hope that it will just survive. Would actually be too hot for me...
I checked the pricings and it seems to me a N+1 would be possible there.
Is this really worth the potential risk? I mean you dont loose too much with 1 drive redundancy in terms of capacity. Of course for the speed its quiet different actually.
But is it really worth the potential risk @NetDynamics24 ? I mean thats of course your decision... but every customer who had lost his data this way would be running around and saying he/she lost data with you and many wont care about the fact that the customer signed up for the risk actually....
No offense here! I consider you a solid provider. I would not like to see that this actually backfired at you this business decision.
What we wanted, is to offer choices for the potential client: RAID-0 for speed and RAID-6 for redundancy. It is the client who will decide what he/she prefers.
In my case I prefer speed while i am keeping more than one backup service.