![]() So your server will be properly configured, fully-functional and ready to go when it arrives at Servers to a scale-out cluster, with the ability toĪ 45Drives storage engineer will set-up your network attached storage according to your needs, ![]() You even have the ability to link together multiple NAS Small business to boost productivity and minimize IT overhead. ![]() Our network attached storage server is great for any business size from the enterprise to the RAM – and an opensource software of your choice for your Operating System (OS) which manages Our NAS solution includes a storage server (Storinator), one or more hard drives, a processor, ![]() Has more storage than a single drive - up to hundreds of terabytes. Share and access files, stream video and audio, and backup data from one central device. This enables multiple computers on a network to The same as a single drive on your computer. A NAS is connected to the Ethernet port on your network and will show up Run out of storage on your desktop or if you know you are going to need a large amount of Is it going to be worth it if something goes wrong? Yes.What is Enterprise Network Attached StorageĪn enterprise network-attached storage (NAS) server, is a device that is connected to yourĬomputer, which serves as a central location for data storage. My answer would be that even if a couple of customised Backblaze pods could be set up with all the redundancy etc that you require, you would still be better off paying extra for enterprise grade support from a major vendor. It sounds like you're interested in the Backblaze but you want to know whether it's possible to give it all the same features that you would find in a "proper" SAN? I don't really understand what you're getting at with this thread. If it doesn't seem like a good analogy then forget it The same thinking would be behind deciding whether to purchase backup vehicles. You would buy multiple components for a storage system if downtime would be too costly and you had the money to spend on reducing the likelihood of that happening. The low price per GB is appealing, but this does seem to be a case of you get what you pay for?Ĭlick to expand.I'm not referring to redundancy of each of the internal components, just the general concept that an organisation may decide that it's worthwhile to invest in redundant equipment. Does that mean you really need two storage pods, and a third smaller server to be the controller for the replication? Do you ultimately need two storage pods and two small controller servers for redundancy?Īt which point is that setup approaching the price of a proper SAN, also accounting for the complexity of this setup and the lack of any kind of enterprise support? If you were to use this system in production you really need two of them to run them in some sort of replication setup. Then what? You have power supply redundancy, you can run a file system that provides drive redundancy, but you are still stuck with a single "controller", meaning the motherboard. So let's say you buy the Storinator, and buy 45 drives to drop into it. (Yes, if you have nothing but time you can build your own for some savings, but meh, that's not the issue.) Then there's a company called 45drives which sells the Storage Pod 4.0 under the name of Storinator at a cost of ~6.9K for the redundant PS version. See: Storage Pod 4.0: Direct Wire Drives Faster, Simpler and Less Expensive As many of you know, there's Backblaze which earlier this year came up with a direct wired (no backplane) enclosure for 45 drives.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |