DYohn
Emo VIPs 
Posts: 18,489
|
Post by DYohn on Aug 23, 2013 17:02:12 GMT -5
I tried listening to music 24/7. (But it didn't work...). You're just not trying hard enough.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2013 20:00:27 GMT -5
I tried listening to music 24/7. (But it didn't work...). Some people have others in the house that may want to use the nas server at all sorts different times. I don't understand why you are taking little stabs at people because they don't do what you think is "the best way". |
|
|
|
Post by GreenKiwi on Aug 23, 2013 21:57:23 GMT -5
I think he was joking, not that a NAS wouldn't work 24/7.
|
|
|
|
Post by yves on Aug 24, 2013 4:59:00 GMT -5
I tried listening to music 24/7. (But it didn't work...). Some people have others in the house that may want to use the nas server at all sorts different times. I don't understand why you are taking little stabs at people because they don't do what you think is "the best way". I am not taking little stabs at people. People are talking baloney to other people by recommending RAID storage as though it were the holy grail when, in reality, for the vast majority of people who just want to play their files, the hard cold truth is RAID is complete and utter overkill, and the same logic applies to letting the harddrives spin 24/7. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2013 10:55:45 GMT -5
So your logic is that, it's overkill and too expensive..... there for, we are clueless.... ?
Yet we like the way we do it, it works great and don't care if the hdd's spin 24/7 (which they don't on pretty much any new NAS server if you don't want them to )... It would seem we don't have the same concerns as you.
|
|
|
|
Post by brubacca on Aug 24, 2013 12:52:12 GMT -5
I recommend my raid style solution because hard drives fail. I have had them fail and I have help others whose drives have failed. I'd rather have an overkill solution than have to re-rip all of my CDs.
I also have this solution for my family pictures as they are not replaceable.
|
|
emovac
Emo VIPs
Saeed al-Sahhaf
Posts: 2,456
|
Post by emovac on Aug 24, 2013 14:31:12 GMT -5
I recommend my raid style solution because hard drives fail. I have had them fail and I have help others whose drives have failed. I'd rather have an overkill solution than have to re-rip all of my CDs. I also have this solution for my family pictures as they are not replaceable. Hard drives do fail. Luckily, they are pretty cheap. I have several backup drives made, just in case. |
|
|
|
Post by yves on Aug 25, 2013 4:47:52 GMT -5
Yet we like the way we do it, it works great and don't care Yes, alot of people like to be clueless, being clueless works great and they don't care that they are clueless. Thank you for proving my point entirely. |
|
|
|
Post by yves on Aug 25, 2013 4:50:43 GMT -5
I recommend my raid style solution because hard drives fail. The idea that a traditional backup plan can be replaced with RAID is wishful thinking at its best. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Aug 25, 2013 5:24:07 GMT -5
I recommend my raid style solution because hard drives fail. The idea that a traditional backup plan can be replaced with RAID is wishful thinking at its best. Okay all tension aside. A serious question - Isn't RAID essentially a 100% updated backup plan? |
|
|
|
Post by yves on Aug 25, 2013 6:27:50 GMT -5
The idea that a traditional backup plan can be replaced with RAID is wishful thinking at its best. Okay all tension aside. A serious question - Isn't RAID essentially a 100% updated backup plan? No, it isn't. In the case of a RAID 1 (mirroring), the goal is to maximize system uptime (with improved read performance being the secondary goal, or bonus). If only 1 harddrive fails in a RAID 1 array, the system continues to function normally. Unless mirroring is combined with multiple hardware controllers that are configured to be part of the same RAID 1 array (duplexing), all data stored on the RAID 1 volume may still be lost in the event of a hardware controller failure. If no reliable backup strategy is used in addition to RAID, the data protection will be inadequate for this reason, as well as due to the fact the data will be subjected to additional risks, such as a user error, a software error, a hacker / virus attack, etcetera. Since RAID 1 is very costly, other RAID levels, such as RAID 5 or RAID 6, for example, may be considered. The idea there is to mitigate the redundancy cost by applying error correction technology as a surrogate to storing the same data twice. Further, if the goal is to maximize performance, it is possible to sacrifice reliability by choosing RAID 0 (striping), but it is also possible to get the best from both worlds, by combining striping with mirroring (see RAID 10). |
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Aug 25, 2013 6:31:48 GMT -5
The idea that a traditional backup plan can be replaced with RAID is wishful thinking at its best. Okay all tension aside. A serious question - Isn't RAID essentially a 100% updated backup plan? RAID 1 for example which is totally mirrored.... Doesn't help when the file system gets corrupted. It corupts both copies! It helps protect against hardware failure but its not foolproof. I thought It would never happen to me - and it did. |
|
|
|
Post by brubacca on Aug 25, 2013 6:34:56 GMT -5
The idea that a traditional backup plan can be replaced with RAID is wishful thinking at its best. Okay all tension aside. A serious question - Isn't RAID essentially a 100% updated backup plan? Garbulky, Not according to current it people / what they teach in school. It is all about minimizing your exposure. A trained IT person would consider RAID as a way to keep uptime at a maximum and a true backup program as a means for disaster relief. In a business you would have a nightly backup that was kept off site in case of fire or something. Raid is also very difficult to setup for the average user although a home NAS makes it easier. I'm really not trying to convince anyone. Backing up is a great plan if you consistently do it. My little system evolved. The way I am doing it with two NAS both Raid 1 I would literally need all 4 hard drives to fail simultaneously to lose the data. I am comfortable with that. I may lose temporary access to the data, but since I can access the raw data on the drives from Linux or Windows I like my plan. I use a ReadyNAS Duo and a Windows Home Server. I know my way is unorthodox, but I like it. WHS is really not Mirrored they have a redundancy plan built into the OS, but I wasn't intending on going into that much detail. Online services like carbonite are also available, but I really don't trust the online community for this. Too many genius hackers out there. Now we really should get back to what the OP wanted to discuss. Sorry for the detour. Regards, Charlie. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Aug 25, 2013 10:15:51 GMT -5
That's helpful but somewhat confusing to me. I have considered RAID but have little knowledge (I have tried to read about it).
I'm not worried about viruses, corruption etc. But I am worried about hard drive failure where an entire hard drive basically doesn't spin up or is recognized - completely kaput, FUBAR. Would having the mirrored hard drives in RAID, allow one to disconnect the failed hard drive and still have all their data intact? I guess that's my question here.
|
|
|
|
Post by yves on Aug 25, 2013 11:20:11 GMT -5
But I am worried about hard drive failure where an entire hard drive basically doesn't spin up or is recognized - completely kaput, FUBAR. Would having the mirrored hard drives in RAID, allow one to disconnect the failed hard drive and still have all their data intact? The failed harddrive would not need to be disconnected for the system to continue to function normally, as if nothing had happened. You would receive a warning message, and that would be it. However, as convenient as that may be if you are listening to your music files when it happens, even if you are not afraid of viruses, something as simple as a power supply glitch could still unexpectedly trash more than just one harddrive in a single spark. If they are spinning when a small earthquake happens, chances could be that you would lose them all. So if you are going to put two harddrives in RAID 1, why not use one of them as a removable external backup storage medium instead? I own a total of 28 TB worth of external harddrive space. Unless you have an excuse that makes proper sense, forget NAS. Get an USB hub and pocket the cash. |
|
|
|
Post by GreenKiwi on Aug 25, 2013 11:25:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by yves on Aug 25, 2013 11:57:33 GMT -5
garbulky the best way to do raid would be to get a NAS.  P.S. - I was going to say never mind him, he is a kiwi (you know, upside down........).  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2013 12:30:30 GMT -5
Yet we like the way we do it, it works great and don't care Yes, alot of people like to be clueless, being clueless works great and they don't care that they are clueless. Thank you for proving my point entirely. LOL, awww typical keyboard hater. "Oh no, someone on the internet does something different than me" I guess being a clown has it's advantages since you get to pet the monkeys any time, 24/7 like a NAS server |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Aug 25, 2013 12:47:16 GMT -5
Thanks greenkiwi, yves, and brubacca. That's what I wanted to know.
|
|
|
|
Post by fast560 on Sept 5, 2013 14:08:13 GMT -5
Windows 8 has something called Storage Spaces, which is a raid-like ability to pool storage in a variety of ways. My music (and family pictures) are on a pool of 2 1-TB drives which are mirrored with Storage Spaces inside a desktop case. Inside the same case is another 1TB drive for File History, which is Windows 8 equivalent to time machine (e.g. backing up user files). Several other drives are used to make system images and offsite backups via USB 3.0 (I use Robocopy).
Storage Spaces will work with external drives, so two usb drives can be mirrored, perhaps for a laptop system. There are some enclosures that take multiple drives, have one USB connection, and look like individual disks to the computer (JBOD).
One configuration is to pool two large external drives (2 2-TB drives) so they are mirrored. You could then create two storage spaces from that pool (like partitions, each with a different drive letter), one for the music, the other for file history. If one drive fails, you are still in business (but unprotected until you replace it). If you delete a file, or it becomes corrupted, it should be recoverable via the file history. The fact that you can use external drives makes this workable for laptops. I would still recommend yet another copy for offsite backups if the data are otherwise irreplaceable.
I don't use a computer for my music because I don't want a monitor and keyboard in my listening space. Even a laptop is too cumbersome and subject to being borrowed by a family member. I have a spare Windows 8 tablet that I would like to try to use (it would fit nicely mounted to a wall) but have yet to find a music application that works natively with touch. Does JRiver? By that, I mean is it designed for touch and not just that you can use your finger like a mouse cursor?
Barring the tablet working, it looks like the Olive One, with its own internal drive, is a great option. $600 for a 1TB drive, but it is compact, has good navigation of albums, a digital out, and networking options if you want them.
|
|
