pedro la peu wrote: > Alexander Hall wrote: > >> Anyway, you don't happen to know any retailers that ship world-wide (or >> at least Sweden-wide), with decent shipping costs? > > They were easy to find in Europe quite recently. Have you seen: > > http://www.plextor-europe.com/wheretobuy/all/dealers.asp?choice=Dealers&country=Sweden
Yes, but all of the retailers I visited only sold other Plextor products (e.g. DVD+-RW etc), but no PX-EH*'s... >> While at the subject, are the Plextor's really as useless for serving >> files as sometimes stated? > > Depends what you expect. Makes a terrific media store for me with the one > caveat that it can't sustain writes to NFS fast enough for DVB recording. > Playback is fine. Audio (at high bit rates) presents no problems at all. > > Typically, I see roughly similar to: > > $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/nfs/sh/tv/testfile bs=1M count=100 > 100+0 records in > 100+0 records out > 104857600 bytes (105 MB) copied, 169.636 seconds, 618 kB/s > > $ dd if=/nfs/sh/tv/testfile of=/dev/null bs=1M > 100+0 records in > 100+0 records out > 104857600 bytes (105 MB) copied, 41.8412 seconds, 2.5 MB/s Ok, really no seatbelt required then... :-) But for occasional documents (and softdep and caching) I could most probably live with that. >> The two drives I'm aiming to buy are supposed to form a geographically >> separated, rsync'd, storage pair. Mainly for documents, i.e. no >> streaming video or so. Samba and nfs comes to mind, but really not much >> more. I'd estimate at most two simultaneous users but probably less. :-) > > NFS and rsync are fine but there's no samba, yet. Oh. That's bad news. I would really like to use the nas from a few windows clients as well... And then, samba is the easy way... I studied the NOT_FOR_ARCHS flags in the ports tree and only noticed a few ports (samba not included) that, from what I could see, would not compile on landisk, but maybe the tree is not entirely updated in this sense, waiting for shared libs on landisk... >> Is the bottleneck a slow processor, the hard drive, lousy I/O or >> something else? > > Don't know, don't care. :-) Fair enough.
