June 8, 201313 yr There are many reasons to use Server 2012 in addition to UnRAID. As an application server; a Hyper-V host; print server; active directory server; Exchange server; etc. In fact Server 2012 is also a very good file server -- and typically is much faster at this than UnRAID, as it uses higher-speed RAID configurations and often has teamed NICs. UnRAID can be a good "partner" with 2012 ... it makes a very nice tiered backup solution.
June 9, 201313 yr I use WHSv1 to backup my Windows boxes. I also use True Image to backup to an unRAID box for a second set of backups - they take more space which is why I like to use WHS as well.
June 9, 201313 yr There are many reasons to use Server 2012 in addition to UnRAID. As an application server; a Hyper-V host; print server; active directory server; Exchange server; etc. In fact Server 2012 is also a very good file server -- and typically is much faster at this than UnRAID, as it uses higher-speed RAID configurations and often has teamed NICs. UnRAID can be a good "partner" with 2012 ... it makes a very nice tiered backup solution. on point Gary. I use SBS 2011 will be moving to 2012 once the whole UnRaid 5 issues are put to bed. I primarily use Unraid for my ESXi datastore via NFS and to store Videos. All of my other files are within the SBS 2011. As a file server, it works very well....Shadow Copies is a life saver; I need active directory, so that I am not trying to remember passwords for every machine in the house. I have OpenVPN, that authenticates via LDAP, so when we are away from home, my wife can connect, without having to remember a different password (or sync password whenever she changes it). I also use the Radius auth for my Wireless router. And finally the SBS 2011 backs up all of my machines, including a VM (and of course SBS itself). CrashPlan is running on the SBS, which is backing up all of the above offsite. There aren't enough plug-ins for UnRaid to replace all of what something like Windows Server does. Comes damn near close though.
June 10, 201313 yr Author I use WHSv1 to backup my Windows boxes. I also use True Image to backup to an unRAID box for a second set of backups - they take more space which is why I like to use WHS as well. But why do prefer WHS to backup your Windows boxes? You still can do unRAID to backup your windows.
June 10, 201313 yr I use WHSv1 to backup my Windows boxes. I also use True Image to backup to an unRAID box for a second set of backups - they take more space which is why I like to use WHS as well. But why do prefer WHS to backup your Windows boxes? You still can do unRAID to backup your windows. WHS makes it VERY simple to fully automate both data and image backups on all of your Windows boxes. It's an excellent choice for that function. UnRAID provides a lot of space, but not the integration with Windows clients that allows WHS to do its "magic".
June 10, 201313 yr I use WHSv1 to backup my Windows boxes. I also use True Image to backup to an unRAID box for a second set of backups - they take more space which is why I like to use WHS as well. But why do prefer WHS to backup your Windows boxes? You still can do unRAID to backup your windows. I have a mix of windows versions. WinXP, Vista and Win7. The backups on each are different and don't work the same for each. Also I don't believe that WinXP can open an Win7 backup. I also don't believe the backups are as efficient as WHSv1 at least not for WinXP backup anyway - less space on disk. I haven't done a backup with Vista or Win7 so I could be wrong about the efficiency with their backup programs.
June 10, 201313 yr I use WHSv1 to backup my Windows boxes. I also use True Image to backup to an unRAID box for a second set of backups - they take more space which is why I like to use WHS as well. But why do prefer WHS to backup your Windows boxes? You still can do unRAID to backup your windows. I have a mix of windows versions. WinXP, Vista and Win7. The backups on each are different and don't work the same for each. Also I don't believe that WinXP can open an Win7 backup. I also don't believe the backups are as efficient as WHSv1 at least not for WinXP backup anyway - less space on disk. I haven't done a backup with Vista or Win7 so I could be wrong about the efficiency with their backup programs. the best thing about the WHS backups is that it's a centralized de-duplication... so most of the common windows 7 files, and office, etc are only stored once. All of my client backups are 185GB; that includes two laptops, a virtual machine, and an HTPC. Does not include photo/video libraries... Not bad ,considering that my laptop alone burns 100+GB of that. A daily differential runs about 9 or 10GB
June 10, 201313 yr Author Cool thanks for info guys. I am going to look more into WHS (or Windows Server 2012) and play around with it. What I am trying to understand why should I use WHM when I can use DeltaCopy or Superflexible which can copy to unRAID. From my understand you use UnRaid for windows backup/storage. You use WHS for windows backup including user dir, documents, photos? What about the D:\ drive? I store all my documents and photos there.
June 10, 201313 yr It really doesn't matter WHERE you backup, as long as you DO I have a simple rule: ANYTHING that I don't want to lose should always be stored in at least 2 places ... more if it's really important. All of my media stored on UnRAID is backed up on a set of extra drives I store in a waterproof/fireproof safe. All of our key data (documents, pictures, music, receipts, financial data, etc.) is backed up MULTIPLE times, including on UnRAID.
June 11, 201313 yr Cool thanks for info guys. I am going to look more into WHS (or Windows Server 2012) and play around with it. What I am trying to understand why should I use WHM when I can use DeltaCopy or Superflexible which can copy to unRAID. From my understand you use UnRaid for windows backup/storage. You use WHS for windows backup including user dir, documents, photos? What about the D:\ drive? I store all my documents and photos there. I don't know much about the two programs you referenced.. but I use my SBS (similar to WHS) because ShadowCopies just works, no tinkering... to that end... My 1 VMDK is 160GB. that's split into 60 for C: and 100 for D:; All my other drives shadow copies are stored on D:. D also has a symlink to my Videos share on Unraid .. there's another two VMDKs a 500GB one that holds all my documents, photos, music etc. The other is a 160GB drive that is dedicated to server backup (it just does a backup of C:). IF any one of those shares gets really large, I'd split it out onto it's own VMDK so that I'm not juggling a risking a huge 1TB VMDK. Lesson I learned - even though UnRaid protects disk failures, it cannot account for things like an improper shutdown. Last week with all the NFS issues I was having, I rebooted windows (forced powerdowns) several times. During one of those, some non essential files got corrupt. Crashplan saved the day.
June 11, 201313 yr Lesson I learned - even though UnRaid protects disk failures, it cannot account for things like an improper shutdown. Last week with all the NFS issues I was having, I rebooted windows (forced powerdowns) several times. During one of those, some non essential files got corrupt. Crashplan saved the day. That's why you need backups !! [Good you had Crashplan] Too many folks think "fault tolerance" means "no need for backups" !! Clearly WRONG!!
June 11, 201313 yr Lesson I learned - even though UnRaid protects disk failures, it cannot account for things like an improper shutdown. Last week with all the NFS issues I was having, I rebooted windows (forced powerdowns) several times. During one of those, some non essential files got corrupt. Crashplan saved the day. That's why you need backups !! [Good you had Crashplan] Too many folks think "fault tolerance" means "no need for backups" !! Clearly WRONG!! ya and lets not forget plain ole user errors (though in my case, I ask Shadow Copies first, then CP)
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.