[mdlug] open source home storage

[Stuart Munro]

I am open to about anyting, I am looking for ideas. not to worried about
electric costs as i also have a esxi server also. I have video, pics and
other stuff. I have 2 mac book pro's and 1 windows pc.

On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 1:45 PM, David Lane <dcl400m at yahoo.com> wrote:

> If you get to the point that that you will really need to split the
> services then you can afford it. the good thing about Linux/Unix is that you
> can do a lot with minimal resources.
>
> David C. Lane
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Aaron Kulkis <akulkis00 at gmail.com>
> To: MDLUG's Main discussion list <mdlug at mdlug.org>
> Sent: Thu, October 8, 2009 1:33:53 PM
> Subject: Re: [mdlug] open source home storage
>
> Stuart Munro wrote:
> > I am looking for a open source home nas, I found openfiler and this may
> > work.
>
> Why would you want to devote a whole machine to doing nothing more
> than file serving?  Are you running some huge website on a LAMP stack
> that's so complicated that filesystem reads are a major bottleneck?
>
> > Does anyone have a suggestion on other solutions? I am fairly new to
> linux
> > and working on trying to figure it out
>
> First thing to do is abandon the Windows 1950's computing mindset---that
> a computer can only do ONE thing.
>
> When I was in college, most computers in the 1 Mhz to 30 Mhz range would
> each perform the following functions:
>
>     mail servers
>     print servers
>     internet routers
>
> all  IN ADDITION to being general workhorse machines with
> anywhere from 15 to 100 users logged in simultaneously
> doing either edit/compile/test-run debug cycles or computationally
> intensive tasks like SPICE (circuit-analysis software based on
> differential equations) simulations.
>
> The only reason there is such a prevalence these days for such things
> as stand-alone routers is because, when Windows finally got TCP/IP
> networking, it was (and remains), such an inherently unstable platform
> which also has great difficulty in doing the rapid context switches
> needed to multitask properly without the server processes interfering
> with each other to the point of corruption.
>
> Remember, a server is a PROCESS (running software), *NOT* the computer
> that happens to be running said software (No matter how much MS
> "partners" misuse the term and try to convince you otherwise!)
>
> Even WITHOUT virtualization, a typical linux machine can safely and
> reliably (i.e. no duplication needed like with "windows servers")
> replace the functionality of 10 Windows machines each devoted to
> some obscenely trivial function (receiving bytes on a network and
> sending those bytes to a printer;  receiving bytes on a network,
> temporarily storing those bytes on disk drives, and later sending
> those same bytes again when requested by an e-mail app; etc.)
>
> There is absolutely no reason that your "NAS" can't be the same Linux
> machine that you use as a desktop machine, running a full GUI like
> KDE 3 or Gnome (KDE 4 is a CPU hog on even the most modern equipment,
> so I don't recommend it for anything less than a quad-core).
> _______________________________________________
> mdlug mailing list
> mdlug at mdlug.org
> http://mdlug.org/mailman/listinfo/mdlug
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mdlug mailing list
> mdlug at mdlug.org
> http://mdlug.org/mailman/listinfo/mdlug
>