lgo51

Members
  • Posts

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by lgo51

  1. Not really... just like a smartphone that doesn't make reliable calls... when it's prime directive is to be a PHONE, the rest of the stuff is just a toy. But who are you to determine what UnRAID's "prime directive" is? Sounds like you decided that in your own head. Oh my, let's see..... yeah, that'd be the CUSTOMER Don't tell my ya'll learned nothing from the tech bubble at the turn of the century!
  2. Not really... just like a smartphone that doesn't make reliable calls... when it's prime directive is to be a PHONE, the rest of the stuff is just a toy.
  3. Thanks for that! ...but now thinking unRAID isn't for my needs (backup repository, a 'vault', rot-proof and drive failure tolerant). Here's the clincher; "This utility only reports file corruption but does not have any means to repair it. This action is with the user." Very true... but cron and mhddfs can solve both of those for me... maybe not the 'perfect' solution, but seems to be better suited for data archival than what unRAID offers, which appears to be AV server / gaming / one-box-does-it-all oriented... cute toy, but doesn't have the resume for trusted data archival. Cheers
  4. Searched all of "All unRAID Application Template Repositories / Support Threads" #37958 but all the 'dynamic's were for DNS or IP ???? This is a bit weird... a NAS without intrinsic multiple parity or bit-rot protection and only some obscure 3rd party plug-in
  5. Howdy all, Not, yet, an unRAID user... am actively shopping the alternatives. Here is my core concern, one that if true would be total deal breaker for housing my growing music & video archive. The folks over at SnapRAID claim: "unRAID doesn't have any kind of checksum, and it just ignores silent errors. Even worse, if a parity error is detected as result of a silent error in the data, the parity is automatically recomputed, making impossible to recover the silent error, even manually." I can find no information to refute, or support, that claim.... so here I be seeking a definitive answer; Is this claim true in v6.x ? Cheers