Vail or Server2008R2?

Y

yossarian

Gawd
Joined
Nov 2, 2004
Messages
799
I've been using WHS v1 for almost two years and it's been fine. I upgraded the hardware about six months ago anticipating Vail, but now it sounds like it may not be what it was anticipated to be. I also have Server 2008 R2 and some have gone to that instead. Since my knowledge of servers is WHS, is it worth considering that? I basically use WHS for the usual home stuff - backups (2 desktops, 2 laptops), media and file sharing. (I just installed Magicjack too, by the way and it works great as a service).

If I switch to Server 2008 R2, am I going to get lost? What are the advantages and disadvantages besides the now defunct Drive Extender? Should I just go to Vail for simplicity and since neither server uses DE? I could try the Beta Vail and Seerver 2008 R2 in a VM?

My hardware is:
MSI 785GTM-E45, onboard Raid 0/1/0+1
Athlon II X4 630 (2.8 GHz)
4 GB mem
2 x 1TB Samsung Ecogreen
1 WD 320 GB

Maybe I'll add two more Samsungs, drop the WD, and go Raid 0+1?

Most discussions get too technical for me, so if you can help by dumbing down any responses it would be helpful.
 
I'm essentially in the same boat as you with the drop of DE. Essentially WHS for me becomes very limited once it drops DE as I rarely use anything but the backup engine, folder duplication, and DE network folder sharing (all which somewhat require DE).

With 2008R2 I could use Flexraid or Unraid and achieve similar goals as with DE, albeit with more work. Duplication can be achieved with either raid or software redundancy programs (saw one, forgot the name...). Sharing a network folder can be as easy as mapping to the new Un/Flexraid system either via Samba or direct NTFS share.

You would most likely want to use Vail inside of a VM on a 2008R2 setup. You'd use the primary 2008 setup with Hyper-V most likely and then use the Vail remote/backups inside that VM.

Basically: You COULD use 2008 to replace WHS, but it will take more work than is currently required from WHS. I personally am waiting until the official release of Vail to see if they will just leave the V1 DE in place and add support for 4k sector (2TB+ drives) from the Server 2008 code base. To me, unless they recode the V2 DE, which was royally sucking, this would be the best alternative.
 
They're not going to add DEv1 back. Vail (and Breckenridge and Aurora) are essentially 2K8 with some added bits so support for the newer drives is a given.

Even for backups, the only thing you gain in Vail is the ability to backup the backups which you can do in WHS with an addon anyway. So it might be better (as in no need to pay for Vail) to just keep running WHS under Hyper-V for backups at the very least. The main thing you lose is drive pooling and duplication via DE.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top