My money is on fake RAID you got there. So use md.
Also because you already use MD. :-)
You know what, I can even move the two disks to my new workstation and not have to transfer any data.
I think the answer may have been found... :D
Actually even better, I can break the RAID 1 on my current box and convert it to non-RAID, then move one of the disks to my new workstation and convert it back to RAID 1. If done right, I think I can do it all without any data loss too.
I'd prefer to just move the two disks and not have to transfer any data... but that's just me.
Yeah. I'll need to copy my home directory to the SSD in my current box before doing that though. That might be easier than breaking/re-creating the RAID. I'm not quite ready to "switch" yet. Hmm...
This won't be an overnight fix. My first step though is complete. The Synology is now in RAID 10 with 1 hot spare disk. One thing to note; the disks in this Synology are WD reds :(. So even though the storage connects to the Hyper-V host via iSCSI, the VHDX stored on it, which contains the data for our file server is at least not living on a RAID 5 anymore.
Next will be dealing with the local storage situation on the Hyper-V host (the two-drive RAID 1 and the three-drive RAID 5). The only "production" VM storage left on the RAID 5 is our Spiceworks VM, which I'll move to the RAID 1 storage. The other VMs that have their VHDs on the RAID 5 are non-production / testing VMs, so if they're lost, it's not a big deal to just rebuild them.
And another +1 To backup storage. That's actually what ~70-80% of our customers do with their SANs when swtiching to StarWind HCA or even VSAN.
Another interesting approach which I see less often is to use 2 existing SAN boxes as a storage capacity addition to the new HCI, with some of that storage actually mirrored between the SANs through the HCI storage virtualization layer. This is where customers can actually keep both backup and testing workloads without breaking the SANs into islands of resources.
True, adding the whole virtualization aspect and container support might caused this. I genuine when testing it out didnt like the new theme or steering me away from being storage server into something else.
I agree, I think that FreeNAS feels like it is drifting now. Is it storage, is it a hypervisor? Any BHyve for normal users, really? The new interface looked cool, but failed to even run when I tested it. They are a tiny company with few resource trying to do way too much. The old FreeNAS product was bad enough, I know loads of places loses data or access to data either because FreeNAS itself was glitchy or because it failed the "front loaded engineering" design principle and left customers in a tight position leading to failure.