Dumb NAS question

[sandor]

Originally Posted by S_M_E

Yeah but you're still stuck with linux on top of needing two machines too. You use what ever floats your boat.

Too funny...

i think that is where we differ -

i view two separate machines as a benefit, you don't.


rock solid server for data <-------> sagetv server for tinkering

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by sandor

i view two separate machines as a benefit, you don't.

I used to. I ran separate shell, web, email, primary dns, secondary dns, IRC and storage servers (plus the various workstations on my LAN) but that was overkill and consolidation and even virtualization is the trend today...

Welcome to the 21st century.

[Beefcake550]

I would throw in that Sage SERVER for tinkering is a bad idea in itself. I did take a while (months) to get the right settings on the server side to my liking, but I haven't touched the server side since then (August). Yes, I do schedule "upgrades" 1-2 tiems per month, but that is to resolve an issue I had, not tinker.

I would think most of the tinkering for SageTV would be on the client side anyhow. So, that would be some info onthe "one machine is better" route.

I'm not trying to change you, jsut give you more information. You have your own needs/wants which no doubt differ from mine.

[sandor]

Originally Posted by S_M_E

I used to. I ran separate shell, web, email, primary dns, secondary dns, IRC and storage servers (plus the various workstations on my LAN) but that was overkill and consolidation and even virtualization is the trend today...

Welcome to the 21st century.

oh, i am in the 21st century, but as i stated before, i tinker with my sagetv server, so it is a box (you could almost call it a test box) that i would not want to keep "critical" data and processes on.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by sandor

i tinker with my sagetv server, so it is a box (you could almost call it a test box) that i would not want to keep "critical" data and processes on.

WHS, with duplication on, would keep the data safe no matter how much you tinkered with Sage.

[TallMomof2]

I'm sold on WHS for Sage and file storage. My server hasn't crashed and it works great at managing and serving files for the entire family. If I need more storage I just throw another drive into the pool. Plus every night everything on all the PCs in the house is backed up. It's painless. I looked at using a NAS but I realized I needed a stable platform for Sage and with WHS I don't need a NAS since all my storage is handled directly by WHS.

[dbullock]

While I do use WHS for SageTV and WHS as a general home network storage server, I also have a D-Link NAS which is used solely for backup of all other servers including WHS server. I have an identical NAS offsite that is a mirror of the NAS at home.

Multiple backups are good. I don't rely on WHS even with duplication or RAID.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by dbullock

I have an identical NAS offsite that is a mirror of the NAS at home.

Multiple backups are good. I don't rely on WHS even with duplication or RAID.

I completely agree that off site backups of critical data is prudent. My comments regarding data security on WHS weren't intended to imply that the data would be safe in case of disaster, such as fire or nuclear war. Just safe in regards to tinkering with other apps, like Sage.

No matter how bad someone hosed Sage on WHS, the media/data in the WHS shares would still be OK. That's what I was getting at.