Search results

Those are some wise words and I fully agree with it. Copies were implemented to mitigate read errors and not provide redundancy against disk failures.

It is hilarious how two particular users take the comments to the extreme and just move off-topic. That aside, Windows Storage Spaces is always an alternative as opposed to SnapRAID/unraid. Anyone has comments regarding that?

Joe, you need to take a chill pill. the OP (or moderators) should be posting comments regarding what is relevant to the discussion or not, and afraid that is not you. And are you proposing to run SnapRAID for the media file server portion and ZFS on the other?

It depends very much on how much of a media server your box really is. I elected to run ZFS because of its superior read performance, its ability to snapshot without causing a huge performance penalty (on-the-fly) and its mere flexibility in expanding the pool. No doubt, I use it also as a file...

SnapRAID is a simple and free solution for those less willing to deal with sophistication. At a simple level, it resembles more of a RAID4 configuration (assuming you start off with similar sized drives). One of the supposed benefit of SnapRAID is only losing data on the drive that fails as...

8GB of ECC RAM is not a problem with ZFS. The recommended configuration is 1GB per 1TB of storage, but I've done 1GB per 4TB of storage and it works just fine even without a log or cache device. ZFS is not that CPU demanding. Why not try running ZFS on the hardware you have first before...

Why not check out the features on Synology's site instead? http://www.synology.com/en-global/dsm/

C5 Current Pending Sector Count states 74 (in hex) = 116 (in dec). I would recommend copying all your important data out as soon as possible if you do not already have a backup. Thereafter, attempt to do a full format (not a quick one) and monitor if the sectors move from "current pending...

If they can be read, they would be remapped to a spare area. Otherwise, they would be marked as bad and the sector would be reallocated to a spare area without the original data. Post a screenshot of the SMART attributes instead of the scan summary. Look for the raw values instead of the...

With the vast majority of the users here being rather savvy, a vendor lock-in model imposed by the Drobo is a definite no-no. I'll second Synology. If you want the features of a Synology and go the DIY route, you could consider Xpenology (an operating system)

You might want to consider if high availability is a concern. If you do elect to use the m500, the frequency of replacing the drive could be higher, and thus should be factored in the planned maintenance schedule.

Try to run an extended smart test, if that fails too I'll definitely request a warranty replacement. > smartctl -t long /dev/<>

Some tools you could use 1. h2testw (link) 2. badblocks with the -w option (link)

Check if it's a Seagate drive. There was a batch of older drives that incremented the Reallocated Count incorrectly.

Based on the screenshots it looks like add-on icons from HDD Sentinel.

Being concerned about not being able to attain the peak sequential read/write speed is not what you are trying to achieve in making the aging laptop more "snappy". Just go with any SSD within your budget from a reputable manufacturer and you would see the performance gains. The key reason why...

You would be better off with ZFS even with non ECC memory. No doubt the risk of a bad memory block would wreck havoc during a scrub, but the probability of that happening is too low to lose sleep over. If you are building a new machine, sure, go with ECC, otherwise, it would be fine for a...

Truth be told, I do not see any potential issues with using the AV-GP as a general purpose hard drive. If anything, cost and the period of warranty drives my purchase decision more than the market WD is trying to segment for.

Robstar is spot on with it. Try to secure erase the drive first. Before (and perhaps after, if it completes successfully), you might want to check the SMART attributes for signs of wear.

Many have had success running FreeNAS atop ESX while passing through the controllers.

If you are somewhat comfortable with the command line interface, I would highly recommend FreeNAS with ZFS. Although you are unlikely to ever have to use the CLI, it would be good to know some basic stuff in case you need to set up more complex permissions (if running alongside Windows...

I have a mix of Greens and Reds running alongside each other and also two Blacks in the NAS. In my experience in the past 3 years, the failure rate of the Reds and Greens are equally bad. I have had freshly recertified drives exhibiting weird problems from "timing out" (with the controller...

If you are going down the ZFS route, you would only need the LSI 9211-8i controller which goes for around $100. Flash it to IT mode and let ZFS take care of the rest.

Files Methodology One-way sync Software GoodSync and rsync Medium From one raidz2 to another raidz2 array Interval Nightly ESX Hosts Methodology Imaging, nightly incremental, monthly full Software Veeam Medium raidz2 dataset

I have previously gotten two cards with 4 USB 3.0 ports and they have been working great the past year. They were based on the VL800/805 chip.