I was thinking a file by file copy - maybe the Rsync method initially - a file by file copy.
I am already using snapshots on pool 1. Is the suggestion that those snapshots get replicated onto pool2? Is that better/safer?
EDIT: Will the replication task work on the same system? I have one physical box with 8x6tb drives as pool1, and 6x2tb drives as pool2. Right now my data size will still work using pool2 as a backup. Am I better off moving that data to another physical box vs using a separate pool?
That is what is being suggested by @Mlovelace and @Ericloewe. It has the major benefit of being able to preserve the entire file system structure (multiple potentially nested datasets), where rsync can only replicate files and folders. Safety is a somewhat different issue.
Replicating to another box avoids the risk of physical loss or destruction of one box taking both pools. It's up to you to decide if that's a risk you need/want to mitigate.
In theory, if it meets the minimum requirements (and your backup storage capacity needs), it should be OK. Others are definitely using the N40L with FreeNAS. I suggest a forum search for N40L to see what kind of experiences people have with it.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.