in the process of migrating to FreeNAS from three ReadyNAS boxes and a QNAP box.
two have data, two are backup. we also back up to the cloud.
i have been using rsync to backup data from the two data nas's to the backup nas's and the cloud, and it has worked fine.
but when i started looking at the FreeNAS features, i found replication, and further review shows i can replicate to another pool in the same FreeNAS box.
i know this isnt the best method of backup, since if the box dies i cant get my data out until its fixed (or i get a new box, since zfs pools seem to be fairly portable). But it is a backup.
Are there any other issues/tradeoffs with doing this? it would save me thousands on a spare box (dont need the storage space or cpu horsepower), and based upon what i have read the data would be just as secure; just a day or so delay waiting on parts to fix the broken hardware before i can access the backup. And i could always use the cloud backup or one of the other backups for the days while im waiting.
in the past i used separate nas boxes because the cpu's couldnt handle more than a few tasks (except the QNAP which has an E3-1246v3 cpu), but this new FreeNAS has dual intel E5-2620's so it should be able to handle most anything.
i guess the one thing i am concerned with is any internal data paths that might become saturated, but it doesnt seem that much different from sending it to another box, so not sure that is really a concern.
thoughts?
one other thing; when the time comes to get that 2nd FreeNAS box, i assume it would be easy to move the 2nd pool over to that box and continue the replication (after changing the hostname)? I cant imagine there is anything different about replicating pools elsewhere, but just in case im missing something... That would allow me to expand the main pool with a 2nd vdev AND remote pool by 2x when needed (probably never, but then again, we always do find a way to fill everything...)
mark
two have data, two are backup. we also back up to the cloud.
i have been using rsync to backup data from the two data nas's to the backup nas's and the cloud, and it has worked fine.
but when i started looking at the FreeNAS features, i found replication, and further review shows i can replicate to another pool in the same FreeNAS box.
i know this isnt the best method of backup, since if the box dies i cant get my data out until its fixed (or i get a new box, since zfs pools seem to be fairly portable). But it is a backup.
Are there any other issues/tradeoffs with doing this? it would save me thousands on a spare box (dont need the storage space or cpu horsepower), and based upon what i have read the data would be just as secure; just a day or so delay waiting on parts to fix the broken hardware before i can access the backup. And i could always use the cloud backup or one of the other backups for the days while im waiting.
in the past i used separate nas boxes because the cpu's couldnt handle more than a few tasks (except the QNAP which has an E3-1246v3 cpu), but this new FreeNAS has dual intel E5-2620's so it should be able to handle most anything.
i guess the one thing i am concerned with is any internal data paths that might become saturated, but it doesnt seem that much different from sending it to another box, so not sure that is really a concern.
thoughts?
one other thing; when the time comes to get that 2nd FreeNAS box, i assume it would be easy to move the 2nd pool over to that box and continue the replication (after changing the hostname)? I cant imagine there is anything different about replicating pools elsewhere, but just in case im missing something... That would allow me to expand the main pool with a 2nd vdev AND remote pool by 2x when needed (probably never, but then again, we always do find a way to fill everything...)
mark
