NAS for file server backup
-
@krisleslie said in NAS for file server backup:
My champion is the Dell PowerEdge R710 which is cheaper up front cost and better than any nas you could name lol!
No, that has high drive cost, high power cost, high set up cost. Better than a desktop, but doesn't compete with many NAS.
-
@pete-s said in NAS for file server backup:
With "NAS" are we talking about:
- the concept "Network Attached Storage"
- a box from some manufacturer that they say is a NAS?
A file server is a NAS y'know.
No, NAS is a file server, a file server is not a NAS. A NAS is a specific type of file server.
-
@dustinb3403 said in NAS for file server backup:
@murpheous said in NAS for file server backup:
@pete-s NAS is netgear readynas or synology. There are others as well.
No. . .
NAS is literally any network attached storage device. It could be a desktop with FreeNAS installed on it, or a Synology or a Dell R710 or any other number of devices.
That's incorrect. NAS is a file server that is sold as an appliance. Building it in some other way cannot be a NAS. NAS means something specific. File server is the general term. And still only applies to devices serving network file protocols.
A SAN is neither a NAS nor a file server, for example, but is network attached, and storage.
-
@scottalanmiller said in NAS for file server backup:
Not really, you can get a decent NAS for $250 at a minimum. I have one right here. Works like a champ. Pays for itself over time in reduced power consumption and reduced heat generation. Plus it saves hours of my time. So it's profitable pretty much instantly in ROI terms vs. a desktop.
What do you have?
What's it running? I know it ain't running FreeNAS! -
@fateknollogee said in NAS for file server backup:
@scottalanmiller said in NAS for file server backup:
Not really, you can get a decent NAS for $250 at a minimum. I have one right here. Works like a champ. Pays for itself over time in reduced power consumption and reduced heat generation. Plus it saves hours of my time. So it's profitable pretty much instantly in ROI terms vs. a desktop.
What do you have?
What's it running? I know it ain't running FreeNAS!ReadyNAS and Synology both when I want a "real" NAS rather than a file server that I've built myself.
When building a file server, I typically use Fedora.
-
When building a file server, I typically use Fedora.
edit
@scottalanmiller I'm Curious, Why Fedora? ( i have no other reason than to be curious, Cause i have no idea what it take to build a File server) -
@scottalanmiller said in NAS for file server backup:
Not really, you can get a decent NAS for $250 at a minimum. I have one right here. Works like a champ.
What model is this ?
-
@fateknollogee said in NAS for file server backup:
@scottalanmiller said in NAS for file server backup:
Not really, you can get a decent NAS for $250 at a minimum. I have one right here. Works like a champ.
What model is this ?
Whatever their two bay starter model is. Been a while since I bought one, the two that I have just keep running.
-
@wrcombs said in NAS for file server backup:
When building a file server, I typically use Fedora.
edit
@scottalanmiller I'm Curious, Why Fedora? ( i have no other reason than to be curious, Cause i have no idea what it take to build a File server)Simple Rule: Because there is no compelling reason to choose an alternative, so stick with your standard.
Complex Reason: Because Fedora is enterprise grade, strongly tuned for storage needs, well supported, kept very much up to date and runs modern code. It avoids licensing costs, bad GUIs, outdated tech and similar pitfalls common to most alternatives.
-
@scottalanmiller said in NAS for file server backup:
@fateknollogee said in NAS for file server backup:
@scottalanmiller said in NAS for file server backup:
Not really, you can get a decent NAS for $250 at a minimum. I have one right here. Works like a champ.
What model is this ?
Whatever their two bay starter model is. Been a while since I bought one, the two that I have just keep running.
Quick Amazon result for reference.
-
@jaredbusch and that's Synology. Last time I priced it out (which was some time ago) the ReadyNAS were cheaper in this small end range.
-
Found a better choice.
-
@scottalanmiller said in NAS for file server backup:
@jaredbusch and that's Synology. Last time I priced it out (which was some time ago) the ReadyNAS were cheaper in this small end range.
ReadyNAS
-
Personal choice, I prefer rackmount!
-
@fateknollogee said in NAS for file server backup:
Personal choice, I prefer rackmount!
Not going to pay the premium for that on a basic NAS without a reason.
-
Anyone tried http://rockstor.com/
-
@jaredbusch said in NAS for file server backup:
@fateknollogee said in NAS for file server backup:
Personal choice, I prefer rackmount!
Not going to pay the premium for that on a basic NAS without a reason.
I hear ya but all my gear is in a rack!
-
@fateknollogee said in NAS for file server backup:
Anyone tried http://rockstor.com/
SF? Really? What is this 2001? No thanks.
-
@fateknollogee said in NAS for file server backup:
Personal choice, I prefer rackmount!
That'll rack up a lot more costs, no matter what, and eliminated the desktop approach, too.
-
@fateknollogee said in NAS for file server backup:
Anyone tried http://rockstor.com/
That stuff is expensive and mostly junk. It's based on designed not meant for SMB use and is not well suited to being shoehorned in where it doesn't fit. I've supported companies that got screwed buying this stuff.
