I came here to note that ixSystems currently has 2 product lines:īoth are based on BSD, both are very similar (95% same codebase). I will certainly review it when it's ready or at least close to ready I wouldn't even call the current master tree "alpha" yet. What you're referring to is TrueNAS Scale it exists alongside TrueNAS, and is not intended as a replacement. If I understand correctly the target is that they are moving to *Debian*, and it will more closely mesh with my servers and desktops and Ubuntu.ĭifferent product. I have rather more experience with XigmaNAS than FreeNAS I've always found it reliable and delightfully to-the-point. It wouldn't have been fair to do that this time around, with TrueNAS 12 still in beta. But automatic bitrot repair isn't very useful on an array that tends to light itself on fire and refuse to mount at all (or permanently wedge itself read-only and at drastically reduced performance). They don't do that because they're ignorant, they do that because btrfs has had an unfortunate habit of throwing itself in a shredder when allowed to manage multiple disk topology by itself rather than being layered atop mdraid.įrustrating, yes. You can’t do bit-rot repair that way.īit-rot repair is a major feature of a “next gen” filesystem like btrfs, and them openly touting that they’re using btrfs when they currently create volumes in a way that can never support bit-rot repair (even if they added bit-rot repair functionality in a future DSM release) is. #Openzfs v5000 software#They create a bunch of single-disk btrfs volumes that are tied together in software into a RAID pool. This irked the shit out of me when I first learned about it (re: Synology), because their hack-job btrfs solution basically makes enabling bit-rot repair impossible without completely rebuilding a Synology RAID volume in the future. Synology used much more traditional mdraid, and deploys btrfs only on top of that to provide snapshots, cloning etc. #Openzfs v5000 full#Rockstor leverages the full power of btrfs: it builds on top of 'raid' devices managed by btrfs. Rockstor and Synology use Btrfs instead of ZFS, but offer similar feature sets. Jim: I would be very interested in a comparison between Truenas Core, Rockstor, and Synology, in terms of interface, features, performance. That said, if I had hardware with more CPU and RAM, I'd probably give TrueNAS a try. It's perfect for what I need, since I'm familiar with the older FreeNAS interface, and I was concerned that the newer version of FreeNAS would have insufficient resources on the older hardware. I just used it to put together a NAS on an older HP Microserver with 4 x 4TB WD Red (the good ones, not the SMR garbage). Will you be comparing and contrasting with XigmaNAS during your second look at TrueNAS Core? XigmaNAS can be installed on Compact Flash/USB/SSD key, Hard disk or booted from a LiveCD/LiveUSB with a small usbkey for config storage. with the following protocols: CIFS/SMB (Samba), Active Directory Domain Controller (Samba), FTP, NFS, TFTP, AFP, RSYNC, Unison, iSCSI (initiator and target), HAST, CARP, Bridge, UPnP, and Bittorent which is all highly configurable by its WEB interface. It includes ZFS v5000, Software RAID (0,1,5), disk encryption, S.M.A.R.T / email reports etc. XigmaNAS supports sharing across Windows, Apple, and UNIX-like systems. XigmaNAS is the simplest and fastest way to create a centralized and easily-accessible server for all kinds of data easily accessed with all kinds of network protocols and from any network.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |