Tag Info

New answers tagged

4

This is entirely dependent on the software you are using. Exchange, for example, does not support NAS protocols such as NFS or CIFS/SMB for its databases; only SAN and DAS solutions like iSCSI or Fibre Channel. There is also general confusion about what constitutes NAS and SAN. Many new products are what is called "unified storage"; a combination of NAS ...


2

No, it would not. Windows Server 2012 supports BitLocker for iSCSI drives directly mounted as block devices, so you may want to consider that. You will not be able to use Bitlocker for a CIFS share.


0

This depends on what type of NAS you have (brand and model, please). If you had something that wasn't particularly tuned to Windows integration (e.g. Isilon or a Linux-based NAS), I would recommend against using it as a file share directly. Also, storage isn't always about throughput... It rarely is. Again, the specific type of device you have will dictate ...


4

This is the kind of question I don't understand the logic behind. Regarding this statement about option 1: Issue I see with this is I wont be able to utilize the extra network capacity of the linked lan ports on the nas as all the sharing is going through the one file server which will create a bottle neck with its own single lan port - That's an ...


3

I'm not familiar enough with NFS to know what specific locking issues you may be referencing, but I generally hear that OpenAFS works better with whole-file locks, yes. However, OpenAFS does not work well with byte-range locks across different machines (that is, locking certain byte ranges in a file, as opposed to locking entire files). If you are only ...


0

You shouldn't need a static route or gateway. Adding the 172.16.2.X interface on Ubuntu with the correct netmask should be enough to connect. I'd suggest removing the gateway for the interface and let the built-in network routing attempt to handle it. If this doesn't work, you may want to check the output of: netstat -rn to see if you have any strange ...


0

The order of the disks won't matter, the configuration for the RAID is stored on the controller, which is in your older system and moving the disks to another controller will just present 8 new disks for it use. It won't know about any existing data. Was the file system encrypted or just a standard RAID 5? Use RAID 6 next time :)



Top 50 recent answers are included