also, with larger drive count SSD arrays, is there a point at which I should be looking at raid 6?

I am considering one big raid 5 with SSD's. My question is this, with equal capacity, is there any real difference between a large number of smaller disks vs a smaller number of larger disks? Assume that everything else is equal in regards to the controller, etc. I am looking at a drive count between say 4 and 16 and ~10-14TB capacity.

@scottalanmiller said in Random Thread - Anything Goes:

that looks like someone I know.

@scottalanmiller said in Random Thread - Anything Goes:

@donahue said in Random Thread - Anything Goes:

@scottalanmiller but you will have to factor in things like speed and distance. gravity and speed to weird things with time.

You just link to earth time as closely as can be calculated and keep them in sync. Only realistic option.

ISNTP -> Interstellar Network Time Protocol?

@scottalanmiller but you will have to factor in things like speed and distance. gravity and speed to weird things with time.

@scottalanmiller said in Random Thread - Anything Goes:

just imagine what it will be like when we have to add a factor for off planet stuff. Yuck.

you still have a landline? Isn't that like having a physical server these days?

are there any good articles on how to create a local CA?

@kris_k said in Miscellaneous Tech News:

www.winamp.com

Wow, that takes me back.

the cost of 2x4tb is basically the same as a single 8tb if we are talking WD red's. One drive at 8TB would be safer than 2x4tb in raid 0. You could always add the second drive and make it raid 1 later.

how critical are those backups? If you needed them and lost them, do you lose more than $800?

maybe personal VPN, like those VPN services?

@scottalanmiller said in Random Thread - Anything Goes:

that just blew my mind.

how to get him on ML?

I've never bothered to setup a certificate for anything internal. I know who they are even if the browser doesn't.

@scottalanmiller said in Getting DHCP BAD_ADDRESS on Windows DHCP:

We are looking for rogue DHCP servers now, but dont' know of where one might be hiding. We've ensure all of the network gear does not have one.

turn off the DHCP you know of and see if you still have DHCP being served. That will easily tell you if you have a rouge DHCP server somewhere.

Ah, I misread because I use NFS to plug mine into ESXi. That is the danger with synology HA. Your standard OS generally wont care of the file drop out for a time while the second synology realizes it has to become the active member. A hypervisor running VM's from it will certainly care though.

@scottalanmiller said in Synology High-Availability Cluster:

@donahue said in Synology High-Availability Cluster:

what are you trying to actually accomplish? From what I understand, the synology HA is an active/passive system and it takes a long time to actually fail over. I say this having no personal experience, but I have researched it because I have 3 synology's. The general consensus seems to be that their HA should not be considered a business level protection and its performance compared to other proper HA solutions reflects this.

@Donahue is correct. If you are using this for NFS HA, it works fine (for things like home shares or a backup target.) But for running live VMs from it, it isn't fast enough and everything fails because of the HA mechanism.

I am not even sure it should be used that way. I would expect that the HA was designed for an SMB share, not intended to produce the HA effect as seen in virtualization. If you use this as a NAS in the conventional sense, then the HA will probably do what you want if you are willing to live with the performance penalties. The two main ones are the delay in the failover and the fact that you are effectively cutting its network bandwidth in half because it has to always be writing to the second box. This is why I ask what the intended use was. There is probably a big difference between using this as a standard NAS that also has HA vs using this to try and get HA storage for a server.

@scottalanmiller said in 802.1x port-based authentication - when and why?:

...(like they knocked the cable off a desk and it plugged itself in as it fell.)

This feels like it should be a meme of some sort.