FreeNAS vs Hardware NAS

scottalanmiller

@scottalanmiller said:

Now the next set of issues is understand the concepts of the question. So let us start by defining what the question is about:

FreeBSD (and Similar) are NAS OSes. They are just a normal operating system with a web (or similar) interface added on to them for the purpose of managing the storage functions of the OS and hiding other functions. That's all. They are just an OS. It is just the software.

NAS is a hardware appliance that takes a server and a NAS OS and provides it as a single package of hardware and software with only an exposed interface for the storage functions (and necessary other configuration) and hiding most of the OS. That's all a NAS implies.

i think you wanted to write FreeNAS instead of FreeBSD , a typo right ?

Yes. You are correct.

IT-ADMIN

actually i have an issue, my topic doesnt appear in the list of topics ???

mlnews

@IT-ADMIN said:

actually i have an issue, my topic doesnt appear in the list of topics ???

In which list of topics?

scottalanmiller

I see it showing up in the "unread" list as usual.

scottalanmiller

Looping back to this, in the past month I've worked with three different companies that all experienced significant data loss or downtime because of their choice of FreeNAS. Two suffered from not having front loaded their engineering and had an inability to support their servers during routine operations and caused major outages because of it along with significant cost for repairs, and one company that lost its data because of unnecessary bugs in the FreeNAS GUI code that would have been avoided has they been simply on FreeBSD.

Additionally this past week FreeNAS 10 "Coral" was demonstrated to be so incredibly unstable a month after being released that they had to recall the release and revert to a "beta" status indefinitely. For a trivial end user application this would be bad, for a critical storage infrastructure component on which companies need to have rock solid faith, it's unthinkable.