[Message Prev][Message
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Message
Index][Thread Index]
Re: Budget network attached storage?
- Subject: Re: Budget network attached storage?
- From: "christopher purves" <CHRIS_PURVES@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 08:48:20 +0000
I think the terrastation is fine as long as you support jumbo frames on
your
switch /network cards - of course for an existing network this is a
limitation but I bought a gigabit switch for around £80 that did and it
works very nicely indeed.
HTH
Chris
>From: Joseph Heenan <joseph-l@xxxxxxx>
>Reply-To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
>To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [ukha_d] Budget network attached storage?
>Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 09:35:12 +0100
>
>In message <20050829233906.C16563@xxxxxxx>
> James Fidell <james@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Quoting Mark Ryder (mark@xxxxxxx):
> >
> > > I have 3TB of storage on my network and have pretty much run
out.
> > > I'm looking for additional NAS as well now for a DVD server
(I've
> > > ripped my DVD images). Whilst the NSLU-2 is a good unit,
I'll
> > > probably go for something like a Buffalo Terrastation this
time,
> > > although the price is daunting at £600 inc VAT for 1TB.
> >
> > I recently did some testing for a client who wanted to use a
Terastation
> > for backups. The performance was horrendously bad. If you're
mostly
> > using it for read access then perhaps it might be ok, but I
couldn't
> > recommend it if you're writing a lot of data regularly.
>
>Was that in a RAID 5 configuration or all configurations?
>
>Joseph
>
>--
>Joseph Heenan, Glasgow, UK http://www.heenan.me.uk/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
UKHA_D Main Index |
UKHA_D Thread Index |
UKHA_D Home |
Archives Home
|