As Gustin said, with a bit more info:
We implemented the NAS when a standard server computer with a RAID
controller started to fail. Luckily we were able to at least get one
pass of RSYNC done before the controller died outright. So while we
already had a RAID 5 solution, the failure of the
RAID is not the same thing as a backup. RAID gives redundancy and
availability, but is not a backup. There is an old rule in backup called
3-2-1. Three different copies of your data, on two different media, with
at least 1 copy *physically* existing somewhere else. RAID addresses none
of these.
Does not RAID with more than 1 drive give a backup? Why do I
need an additional hard drive to back up to?
On Sun, 01 Jun 2014 22:16:06 -0600
Shawn Grover wrote:
> I bow to the other info presented in this thread. But I can
> comment a little on the hardware.
>
> We picked up both a 2 bay and
I bow to the other info presented in this thread. But I can comment a
little on the hardware.
We picked up both a 2 bay and 4 bay QNAP box at work. Both have been
running very reliably and are surprisingly quite. Both are loaded up
with 4TB drives. The 2 bay unit is configured in Raid1, so
100% agree with Gustin. RAID-6 or just close your eyes and hope for the best.
On 14-05-31 08:30 PM, Gustin Johnson wrote:
> Without getting too deep into the technical side of things, the short short
> overview
I think a lot of people have intuitive problems with RAID risk exposure.
Modern di
Without getting too deep into the technical side of things, the short short
overview is that even in a 4 bay array, RAID5 is to be avoided. If you
need more space then buy a larger array. There is no reason to take that
kind of chance with your data. With the size of current drives, a rebuild
of
Having an off site storage would be ideal, personally i don't like the cloud.
Maybe you can simply barter it with your next door neighbor. At
$60/year/computer the cloud is not very cheap either.
I do agree with Gustin on the raid 5 being surpassed by raid 6, however if
you are going to settle
Offsite would be ideal, though probably easier and cheaper to use an online
backup service like Carbonite.
Typically a NAS just sits somewhere in your network.
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 11:22 PM, Joe S wrote:
> Thanks for the info. I'll have to look at raid. Don't know
> anything about it at the
Thanks for the info. I'll have to look at raid. Don't know
anything about it at the moment and don't really have the time
at present. NAS I'm assuming to make it worthwhile I would have
to have someplace outside my residence to back up to?
On Fri, 30 May 2014 11:43:45 -0600
Gustin Johnson wrote:
Just a couple of comments:
RAID 5 is to be avoided at all costs. This is a complicated topic but the
short answer is that I don't know anyone for whom RAID5 is a good idea.
Raid 1, 10, and 6 are the levels that interest you.
"Green" branded drives are fine since most NAS enclosures do not use a
Hi Joe,
Having a single drive external, while better than nothing is way not as good
as having a 2 bay / drive raid 1 enclosure. in terms of safety i am talking. A
step up in terms of safety would be a 4 drive raid 1 or 5 enclosure. A step up
in all these cases, is having the drives/enclosures a
11 matches
Mail list logo
