snapshot based redundancy (FlexRAID Vs SnapRAID )

iakovl

Weaksauce
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
104
before i finish my build (E350 + 5*2TB) i need to decide :)rolleyes: i know) on OS and redundancy plan

due to the fact that i really don't need live raid i decided to go on with snapshot raid that will be done once a week

my options right now are
SnapRAID - http://snapraid.sourceforge.net/
FlexRAID - http://www.flexraid.com/

there is a small problem with snapraid is that it doesn't create a data pool but uses hdd as they are (balancing data on 5 2TB hdd is a pain)

there was also an option of making a mix of them both, with flex for the data pool and snapraid for redundancy
 
I am currently considering either unRAID or flexRAID.
Obviously they each bring something different to the table.
My question is, how do you like the performance of FlexRAID on AMD zacate?

I like the free part but use my zacate system as my HTPC. If it's more than able to handle the OS and flexRaid I may just go with it over unRAID. Do you have any slow downs our stutter?
 
I'd go with FlexRAID. Storage pooling is just damn nice for a file server, and it can run on top of Windows 7 which is what I need when I roll my HTPC into my fileserver. unRAID runs a priopritary OS unless you are willing to virtualize.
 
The new version of FlexRAID is very nice - much easier to use than the old versions, so I'd go with FlexRAID. As long as you aren't actually running an update, FlexRAID doesn't cause any performance impacts, so I wouldn't worry about using it on the HTPC - just schedule the updates at night.

I'm not using the storage pooling though, so I can't speak to how well that works.
 
I only use storage pooling currently and it works fine. I had some problems upgrading from an older version (it's still in beta) but I found the culprit easily on the project's forum.

I'm pooling 11*2TB, and it's windows crappy explorer that has problems dealing with that.
 
Back
Top