Wol's lists wrote:
> On 11/11/2018 00:45, Dale wrote:
>> This is a lot to think on. Money wise, and maybe even expansion wise, I
>> may go with the PCI SATA cards and add drives inside my case. I have
>> plenty of power supply since it pulls at most 200 watts and I think my
>> P/S is like 700 or
On 11/11/2018 00:45, Dale wrote:
This is a lot to think on. Money wise, and maybe even expansion wise, I
may go with the PCI SATA cards and add drives inside my case. I have
plenty of power supply since it pulls at most 200 watts and I think my
P/S is like 700 or 800 watts. I can also add a ex
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 8:16 PM Dale wrote:
>> I'm trying to come up with a
>> plan that allows me to grow easier and without having to worry about
>> running out of motherboard based ports.
>>
> So, this is an issue I've been changing my mind on over the years.
> There are a
On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 3:17 AM Bill Kenworthy wrote:
>
> I'll second your comments on ceph after my experience - great idea for
> large scale systems, otherwise performance is quite poor on small
> systems. Needs at least GB connections with two networks as well as only
> one or two drives per hos
On 09/11/18 01:16, Dale wrote:
> Howdy to all,
>
> I have a interesting problem coming up. Currently, I have two 3TB
> drives for my /home mount point. A lot of this is videos but some pdf
> files and other documents as well plus a photo collection of family
> stuff etc.
>
> Filesystem
On Friday, November 9, 2018 3:29:52 AM CET Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 8:16 PM Dale wrote:
> > I'm trying to come up with a
> > plan that allows me to grow easier and without having to worry about
> > running out of motherboard based ports.
>
> So, this is an issue I've been chan
On Fri, 9 Nov 2018 10:07:58 +0800, Bill Kenworthy wrote:
> I have used a mini-pcie board from ebay (takes two sata connections)
> alongside a number of other connection types in a btrfs raid 10 for some
> months as a temporary expansion - worked fine, but make sure to check
> Linux compatibility f
On 09/11/18 10:29, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 8:16 PM Dale wrote:
>> I'm trying to come up with a
>> plan that allows me to grow easier and without having to worry about
>> running out of motherboard based ports.
>>
> So, this is an issue I've been changing my mind on over the ye
On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 8:16 PM Dale wrote:
>
> I'm trying to come up with a
> plan that allows me to grow easier and without having to worry about
> running out of motherboard based ports.
>
So, this is an issue I've been changing my mind on over the years.
There are a few common approaches:
* F
On 09/11/18 09:43, Dale wrote:
> Jack wrote:
>> On 2018.11.08 20:16, Dale wrote:
>>> Howdy to all,
>>>
>>> I have a interesting problem coming up. Currently, I have two 3TB
>>> drives for my /home mount point. A lot of this is videos but some pdf
>>> files and other documents as well plus a photo
entoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Sent: Fri., 09 Nov. 2018 9:43
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Hard drive storage questions
Jack wrote:
> On 2018.11.08 20:16, Dale wrote:
>> Howdy to all,
>>
>> I have a interesting problem coming up. Currently, I have two 3TB
>> drives for my /home
Jack wrote:
> On 2018.11.08 20:16, Dale wrote:
>> Howdy to all,
>>
>> I have a interesting problem coming up. Currently, I have two 3TB
>> drives for my /home mount point. A lot of this is videos but some pdf
>> files and other documents as well plus a photo collection of family
>> stuff etc.
>>
On 2018.11.08 20:16, Dale wrote:
Howdy to all,
I have a interesting problem coming up. Currently, I have two 3TB
drives for my /home mount point. A lot of this is videos but some pdf
files and other documents as well plus a photo collection of family
stuff etc.
Filesystem
Howdy to all,
I have a interesting problem coming up. Currently, I have two 3TB
drives for my /home mount point. A lot of this is videos but some pdf
files and other documents as well plus a photo collection of family
stuff etc.
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use
On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Todd Goodman wrote:
>
> As for keys, you could use Amazon's AWS Key Management Service.
> Of course they could be sitting there gathering keys, but at some point
> you either have to trust they'll do what they say or simply decide not
> to use them at all (IMNHO.)
* Rich Freeman [150509 09:00]:
[..SNIP..]
> One thing you can't cheaply do with Amazon is verify your backups.
> Duplicity will happily check the data files against the manifest
> hashes with a simple command, but it will cost you 10c/GB for whatever
> you verify, since it will need to be transfer
On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 6:56 AM, Dale wrote:
>
> https://aws.amazon.com/s3/
>
> I'm trying to figure out just how much this would cost here. o_O Just
> for my pics tho.
>
It works out to 1-3 cents/GB/month, depending on storage tier.
Glacier is cheapest and very secure (or so they claim), but yo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 04 May 2015 05:40:25 -0500, Dale wrote:
>
>>> You only need to upload it once, so it doesn't really matter how long
>>> it takes. After that you do incremental backups. I use
>>> app-backup/duplicity which not only takes
On 06/05/15 06:21, Bill Kenworthy wrote:
> On 06/05/15 05:50, Neil Bothwick wrote:
>> On Tue, 5 May 2015 08:53:29 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>
>>> In general btrfs tends to do most of its fixing online. I'd only run
>>> btrfs check if the filesystem is unmountable.
>>
>> That's the only time I've
On 06/05/15 05:50, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Tue, 5 May 2015 08:53:29 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
>> In general btrfs tends to do most of its fixing online. I'd only run
>> btrfs check if the filesystem is unmountable.
>
> That's the only time I've had to use it. This was on a laptop with a
> s
On Tue, 5 May 2015 08:53:29 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> In general btrfs tends to do most of its fixing online. I'd only run
> btrfs check if the filesystem is unmountable.
That's the only time I've had to use it. This was on a laptop with a
single SSD, so there was no where to sync good data f
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Tue, 5 May 2015 13:05:55 +0100, Mick wrote:
>
>> During a backup of a home directory I noticed loads of Chromium and
>> Firefox crash/recovery files being copied over. However, I don't know
>> if this is a btrfs problem, or the fact that I
On Tuesday 05 May 2015 13:21:47 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Tue, 5 May 2015 13:05:55 +0100, Mick wrote:
> > During a backup of a home directory I noticed loads of Chromium and
> > Firefox crash/recovery files being copied over. However, I don't know
> > if this is a btrfs problem, or the fact that I
On Tue, 5 May 2015 13:05:55 +0100, Mick wrote:
> During a backup of a home directory I noticed loads of Chromium and
> Firefox crash/recovery files being copied over. However, I don't know
> if this is a btrfs problem, or the fact that I had to forcefully shut
> down KDE once or twice recently, b
On Tuesday 05 May 2015 12:33:38 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Tue, 5 May 2015 06:56:20 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > > I don't know about btrfs, seems like it's still in a testing-phase so
> > > i'm not touching it yet.
> >
> > My understanding is that both zfs and btrfs on linux are fairly
> > exper
On Tue, 5 May 2015 06:56:20 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > I don't know about btrfs, seems like it's still in a testing-phase so
> > i'm not touching it yet.
>
> My understanding is that both zfs and btrfs on linux are fairly
> experimental. The codebase for zfs is much more mature in general,
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Nuno Magalhães wrote:
>
> Another approach is ZFS with RAID-Z or similar. I don't know how/if
> ZFS splits data among the drives, but i assume it's wise enough to do
> so in a way similar to a RAID+LVM combo.
>...
>
> I don't know about btrfs, seems like it's still
On 04/05/2015 20:42, Nuno Magalhães wrote:
> Greetings gents.
>
> I may have missed it, but i haven't seen this suggested yet: RAID+LVM.
> If you already have a 3TB drive, buy another (or two more) and build a
> RAID1 or 5 array on them. Then build your LVM on top of /dev/md0 (or
> whatever device
On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 02:23:55AM -0500, Dale wrote
> Dale wrote:
>
> Well, I read replies a few times and I think it is best to just add a
> new drive. Heck, I've already had a 3TB drive to fail. Anyway, I also
> need to look into some sort of backup system. I used to do this with
> DVDs but
Greetings gents.
I may have missed it, but i haven't seen this suggested yet: RAID+LVM.
If you already have a 3TB drive, buy another (or two more) and build a
RAID1 or 5 array on them. Then build your LVM on top of /dev/md0 (or
whatever device your raid is).
Another approach is ZFS with RAID-Z or
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 6:31 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 04 May 2015 03:23:48 -0500, Dale wrote:
>
>> >> What
>> >> I wish, I had a second puter in a outbuilding that I could copy to
>> >> over ethernet or something. May help in the event of a house fire
>> >> etc.
>> >
>> > You have, it's
On Mon, 04 May 2015 05:40:25 -0500, Dale wrote:
> > You only need to upload it once, so it doesn't really matter how long
> > it takes. After that you do incremental backups. I use
> > app-backup/duplicity which not only takes care of incremental backups
> > and communicating with S3, but also enc
Hello, Dale.
On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 03:23:48AM -0500, Dale wrote:
> Neil Bothwick wrote:
> >> What I wish, I had a second puter in a outbuilding that I could copy
> >> to over ethernet or something. May help in the event of a house
> >> fire etc.
> > You have, it's called Amazon S3 :) It's a l
Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 04 May 2015 03:23:48 -0500, Dale wrote:
>
What
I wish, I had a second puter in a outbuilding that I could copy to
over ethernet or something. May help in the event of a house fire
etc.
>>> You have, it's called Amazon S3 :) It's a lot cheaper th
On Mon, 04 May 2015 03:23:48 -0500, Dale wrote:
> >> What
> >> I wish, I had a second puter in a outbuilding that I could copy to
> >> over ethernet or something. May help in the event of a house fire
> >> etc.
> >
> > You have, it's called Amazon S3 :) It's a lot cheaper than a second
> > comp
Mick wrote:
> On Monday 04 May 2015 08:46:26 Neil Bothwick wrote:
>> On Mon, 04 May 2015 02:39:10 -0500, Dale wrote:
>
>>> I really do need to set up RAID at least for some stuff that I may not
>>> be able to get back. Some videos I have are no longer available.
>>
>> RAID is not a backup solution
Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 04 May 2015 02:39:10 -0500, Dale wrote:
>
>>> I wasn't suggesting symlinks, just LVs mounted at appropriate points.
>>> It rather depends on the spread of Dale's data. If he just needs
>>> extra space for his videos, he could get a new drive and mount it at
>>> ~/vide
On Monday 04 May 2015 08:46:26 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 04 May 2015 02:39:10 -0500, Dale wrote:
> > I really do need to set up RAID at least for some stuff that I may not
> > be able to get back. Some videos I have are no longer available.
>
> RAID is not a backup solution.
Not only RAID
On Mon, 04 May 2015 02:39:10 -0500, Dale wrote:
> > I wasn't suggesting symlinks, just LVs mounted at appropriate points.
> > It rather depends on the spread of Dale's data. If he just needs
> > extra space for his videos, he could get a new drive and mount it at
> > ~/videos.
>
> The bulk of the
Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 08:13:41 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>
>>> An alternative is to create a new volume group on the new disk and
>>> mounts PVs at various points in your home directory. That way you get
>>> the extra space and much of the flexibility without the risk of a
>>
Dale wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> << SNIP >>
>
> Dale
>
>
>
> P. S.
>
>
> Filesystem Size Used AvailUse% Mounted on
> /dev/mapper/Home2-Home2 2.7T 1.8T 945G 66% /home
>
>
>
Well, I read replies a few times and I think it is best to just add a
new drive. He
On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 08:13:41 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > An alternative is to create a new volume group on the new disk and
> > mounts PVs at various points in your home directory. That way you get
> > the extra space and much of the flexibility without the risk of a
> > failure on a single dr
On 28/04/2015 17:24, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Apr 2015 17:01:49 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>
>> When you use only LVM for this and nothing else, you have a high risk of
>> losing everything if one disk fails. Why? Because LVM decides itself
>> which extent it will put data on. Maybe a wh
Daniel Frey wrote:
> On 04/27/2015 12:41 AM, Dale wrote:
>> What do you guys, gals too, think about this? Just add a drive or buy a
>> larger drive and move things over? Or is this a six of one and half
>> dozen of the other thing?
> I just went through this myself, and I found a NAS with four d
On Tue, 28 Apr 2015 14:31:23 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> >> btrfs raid5 is still fairly experimental (though now it supports
> >> recovery) and works more-or-less how you'd expect raid5 to work.
> >> Raid1 on btrfs gives you the capacity of n/2 and not n-1 disks,
> >
> > You're right, I was cle
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Apr 2015 13:38:55 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
>> > The same is also possible with BTRFS, including built in RAID. RAID5
>> > in btrfs is expermiental, but its RAID1 is like RAID5 in some ways,
>> > such as giving the capacity of
On 04/27/2015 12:41 AM, Dale wrote:
> What do you guys, gals too, think about this? Just add a drive or buy a
> larger drive and move things over? Or is this a six of one and half
> dozen of the other thing?
I just went through this myself, and I found a NAS with four drives in
it. I actually g
On Tue, 28 Apr 2015 13:38:55 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > The same is also possible with BTRFS, including built in RAID. RAID5
> > in btrfs is expermiental, but its RAID1 is like RAID5 in some ways,
> > such as giving the capacity of n-1 disks and tolerating a single disk
> > failure.
>
> btr
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 11:24 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> The same is also possible with BTRFS, including built in RAID. RAID5 in
> btrfs is expermiental, but its RAID1 is like RAID5 in some ways, such as
> giving the capacity of n-1 disks and tolerating a single disk failure.
>
btrfs raid5 is st
Howdy,
I have a 3TB hard drive that I use for my /home partition. I'm going to
be having to expand this before to long, lots of videos on there. The
4TB is a bit pricey and I would end up having to expand that to before
to long. So, I got to thinking, why not buy another 3TB drive and just
add
On Tue, 28 Apr 2015 17:01:49 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> When you use only LVM for this and nothing else, you have a high risk of
> losing everything if one disk fails. Why? Because LVM decides itself
> which extent it will put data on. Maybe a whole file is on one disk,
> maybe it's spread acro
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 4:39 AM, Dale wrote:
>
> What do you guys, gals too, think about this? Just add a drive or buy a
> larger drive and move things over? Or is this a six of one and half
> dozen of the other thing?
>
Generally I buy drives at the sweet spot in cost/capacity, so that is
abou
On 28/04/2015 10:39, Dale wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> I have a 3TB hard drive that I use for my /home partition. I'm going to
> be having to expand this before to long, lots of videos on there. The
> 4TB is a bit pricey and I would end up having to expand that to before
> to long. So, I got to thinking
2015-04-28 5:39 GMT-03:00 Dale :
> Howdy,
>
> I have a 3TB hard drive that I use for my /home partition. I'm going to
> be having to expand this before to long, lots of videos on there. The
> 4TB is a bit pricey and I would end up having to expand that to before
> to long. So, I got to thinking
Howdy,
I have a 3TB hard drive that I use for my /home partition. I'm going to
be having to expand this before to long, lots of videos on there. The
4TB is a bit pricey and I would end up having to expand that to before
to long. So, I got to thinking, why not buy another 3TB drive and just
add
55 matches
Mail list logo
