geekette

Members
  • Posts

    160
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by geekette

  1. I do login just as root and issue the mv command--no problems so far.
  2. These are at $109 now, store pickup only. So I guess these means sales tax of course.. so you're looking at approximately $120 assuming your state has a sales tax. I suppose this is a good deal since I jsut paid $120 for a new WD of Amazon that only has a 2 year warranty--this one is still 5 year warranty.
  3. This only has a 1 year warranty btw. I think I am just going to stick with drives that have 5 year warranties--like the recent one at best buy: the 2tb for $99. Heck I even got a used wd 2tb for $90 inlcuding shipping from eBay with a manufacturer warranty that ends at the end of 2013--longer than this warranty.
  4. I am going to take a guess and say get the PCI over the PCI-E card if your motherboard has PCI slots. This is because the bandwidth of one PCI slot can easily accommodate 1 gigabit network, whereas a PCI-E x1 slot can accommodate two drives. (one pci slot can't accomnodate two drives well because they'd be a lot slower than 100MB/s on simultaneous access--e.g. parity checks). I bought the PCI-E Intel NIC and wish I had gotten the PCI version of it. Btw, I bought a $35 PCI-E intel card for only $20 on eBay--it was pulled out of a brand new system that came with it, but didn't need it. So you might wanna look for deals on used NICs on eBay if you don't fear that market--I like it as of late because of the good buyer protection it offers.
  5. Yeah I did create a share that only the user "admin" can access read/write. The rest can only read it. But I have another share that any user can read/write to and I have to move some files they add to this share to the read only share. Say for example if my guy downloads some television show, he puts it on the read/write share temporarily and then I have to move it to the read only share because I don't want any viruses, hacks, trojans, accidents from wiping it out.
  6. I really don't think that is unethical at all since the unit was just purchased less than 30 days ago, and there are no seals on the housing. I could swap the housing and send back the defective unit with the shiny perfect housing. But I managed to finally work out somethign with newegg after speaking with a manager--she'll let me know tomorrow (Monday) for sure whether or not I can return it scratched.
  7. I see no group options in the unraid gui. I don't have the active directory version though. I am using unRaid Plus.
  8. I want a new motherboard and I need to go with Gigabyte for my wackintosh. I like the features of this board including x16 x8 x4 slots and more. Does it support VT-d for ESXI?
  9. I spoke with a Newegg supervisor and they are trying to work out something for me--I'll know Monday.
  10. Well I found out where the documentation was for this unit: It's printed on the box, lol! (I stumbled upon it as I was putting the defective unit back in the box for RMA to Newegg.) I took a photo of it: http://www.flickr.com/photos/64687432@N05/7319348204/in/photostream I have read a lot of threads about people replacing the fans on these units because they were so loud; I wonder if they knew there were jumpers on the unit to cut the fan speed in half?--thereby decreasing the noise.
  11. I bought one a week ago from Newegg. When you install it you will invariably scratch up the sides of the unit because it is SOFT aluminum and they made it wide to be a very tight fit. The unit I got has a bad LED in bay one. Newegg is giving me hassles about returning it because of the scratches on the side of the unit. So this unit is not a good idea at all in my opinion.
  12. So is the best way to use time machine to buy a dedicated hard drive for it?
  13. Probably a great idea since the bottleneck is the gigabit network and not the drive. Also by having a 2tb hdd as a cache drive, you have a warm spare if one of your other drives fail.
  14. Believe it or not I got the car trunk idea from John C. Dvorak, lol. I think it's actually a great idea Just make sure the data is on an encrypted volume, or encrypted. That way if it gets stolen no one can get to your data. Sure beats paying for offsite storage
  15. So it's safe to issue the mv command I mentioned then? : mv /mnt/user/share1/folderxyz /mnt/user/share2/.
  16. I deliberately want a read only user share to hold for example my movies. So anyone--except a special administrative user account--that accesses this user share can only ever read from movies, not write. This prevents trojans, viruses and accidental deletion from destroying the movies. Then I'll have another share that users can read and write to, to drop off new movies (or whatever). Then I log in with the nas administrative account and *move* the movie from the read/write share to the read only share--then immediately log out. I got this all worked out except it does a copy instead of move when going from share to share on my mac.
  17. When you try to move something from one share to another, from the client, not the server, it does a copy instead of a move. That's the problem, not permissions problem.
  18. If I could only set security on a folder/file level, it'd be easier.. Perhaps I need to look into the active directory version?
  19. I want to move some files from a read/write share to a read only share on my unRaid server. If I try and move them from one share to another on my mac, it does a copy and takes forever--instead of a move. Is it safe to telnet into the unRaid Server, login as root and issue the following command? : mv /mnt/user/UserShare1/folderxyz /mnt/user/UserShare2/. Both UserShare1 and UserShare2 are multi-disk shares that copy data to the entire array. UserShare2 is a read only share--to the users--and UserShare1 is a read/write share.
  20. I thought about theft, fire, viruses and accidental deletion. Regarding theft I am thinking about implementing some sort of theft-deterrant cage around the system; I can come up with something that would deter a thief from spending too much time trying to steal that case and just move on to another item in the house that is more easily stolen. Regarding fire, I have a smoke alarm and I"m always home--I never really go on vacation.. so not too worried there---I'll just run outside with my NAS and a few other belongings (If there is time) -- I'll keep backups of critical data in my car trunk (this dont' inlclude movies, television shows, music library). Viruses and accidental deletion: I am going to make most of my share's read only to the user account I am logged in as all the time on my computer. I'll setup a read/write dropbox/dropoff location to put new things and then login with an administrative account to move things aroudn.. or just ssh/telnet into the unRaid server and move them by hand. For those shares that are read/write all the time to my normal user account, I'll make sure all that data is backed up daily and moved offsite regularly (i.e. my car trunk).
  21. If: 1) I create a User Share to be used only for Time Machine backups and limit it to say 500GB 2) I create this Time Machine User Share to use only one disk, say disk2 3) say disk2 is already a part of another user share using high water allocation method Will the high water allocation method be smart enough to realize there is another User Share using the particular drive for Time Machine backup and will it take that 500GB limit into consideration--treat it like a 1.5tb hard drive instead of 2tb? Or do I really need to have an entirely separate hard drive for time machine backups? I have an old 60MB/s 7200RPM 250GB hard drive laying around--but it would take a drive bay which kind of stinks. Only other thing that comes to mind is just to include all the disks in the Time Machine share--limited to 500gb--and let it write all the files to any disk but this doesn't seem very ideal. Perhaps there is a good solution--please recommend, thanks!
  22. I upgraded my client to Lion and the AFP performance improved, so I'll just stick with AFP for now--until I have more problems lol.
  23. In addition it's more than jbod because it is protected via a parity disk
  24. unRaid detects 1953513492 on my HD204UI. My WD20EARS and WD20EARX have the same exact number of blocks: 1953514552 -- 1060 more blocks than my HD204UI. So my 2TB HD204UI can never be a parity drive -- which makes things a bit inconvenient. I did--don't now--have this HD204UI on a Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3L motherboard which is known to put HPA on HDDs. So is this why I have 1060 less blocks than the WD20EARS & WD20EARX? I ran a 30 hour (or so) preclear on the HD204UI and it succeeded and is running fine.