I’ve been able to schedule regular backups of log, conf, and other data files however, transfer rates have averaged around 40-60kbps, making Livedrive inappropriate to mount more dynamic content, at least from my locations.
#JOTTACLOUD SYNOLOGY FULL#
(1) Whilst ‘m located in Toronto, I also maintain ESX and Amazon EC2 cloud servers at the XO Communications facility in Chicago and the Amazon Virginia facility) there is significant latency and overall low throughput to Livedrive, thus, I haven’t been able to realize Livedrive’s full potential as a full cloud storage solution. It was important to me that the HDs are endurance runners with high MTBF values and still have little noise and low power consumption.Ģ) It is also a question of whether the capacity of 4 and more SSD or M2 modules are not enough because these also have very high runtimes today.I want to appreciate Livedrive’s recognition of the importance–and the need–for a secure transport for customers who are using Linux although I consider myself an early adopter and supporter of the original paid Livedrive unlimited storage solution, two primary considerations had limited my ability to apply it fully: because here also run some VMs (virtual machines). in addition, I have 2 M2 modules installed to outsource the permanent data exchange on memory chips. I just bought a new NAS system with new server HDs Seagate EXOS X about 1 year ago. I also had good experiences with Western Digital RED 2,3,4TB. The raid was set up as Raid6 so 2 HDs could fail without losing data. Mostly it was starup problems that led to the raid reported a faulty HD. Then come the first messages that one and then another HD makes problems. Nevertheless, the HDs lasted for many years. These HDs were not designed for continuous use in a server or NAS system at that time. because the NAS system only served to backup my image, music and photo collection.Īt that time still Samsung 2 TB HDs HD204UI
#JOTTACLOUD SYNOLOGY PC#
My choice was Backblaze, but YMMV.ġ) In my first NAS system which runs only occasionally I still used desktop PC HDs. The cloud backup companies make it really easy, there are good comparisons between them, so I’d recommend that path too. Having multiple backups, with at least one off-site and current is important. My backups for my FM3/FM9 and FX3 also get backed up to my Google Drive. Because I rarely need to access the photos they’re only backing up remotely, but the music and other chunks of data that are important to me also get backed up to my in-house back up. Periodically I swap to a different local drive, either pulling from the previous local disk, or from the storage system in the cloud. I have a LOT of photography images from when I shot pro-rodeo, and also have a big music collect on disk, and rather than store them on RAID at home, I opted to keep them on two different high quality drives locally and back them up to the cloud and let someone else manage the hardware aspect.
That said, the main reason we run NAS at home is for big storage. The downside is having to buy multiple big SSD because they’re not cheap and eventually they will fail too. It’s been a few years since I was IT-ing for reals, but I think I agree with that SSD RAID would work well for such a use.
0 kommentar(er)
