Joined: 23 Jul 2017 Posts: 725 Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 0:38 Post subject:
Does it matter? The biggest USB drive on the market is 5TB. The largest drive available right now is a 15TB device designed to fit in a data centre rack, it would be pretty ugly trying to connect it via USB.
thx for your reply, but in case your answers only consist of counterquestions then you should keep your breath and keep them by yourself. It was a simple Question, and if you don't know the answer, why not simply keep silent then Besides my usb drive I'm Talking about is a raid 5 drive with about 30TB. So Long ...
thank you very much for your answers. Yes of Course I tried ext4, since ext2/3 are not even able to grow above 16TB. ext4 does if the filesystem is set to 64bit (4K Blocks) with e2fsprogs and resize2fs. I could get e2fsprogs with entware tuo my DD-WRT (v3.0) and I could even prepare the filesystem within DD-WRT (ssh) this way, but when I try to mount the Partition I get the message 'filesystem too large'. Maybe it's the Linux kernel or the processor of my router (ARMv7), I don't know but it seems to be not possible. But anyway, thank you very much for your inouts.
I honestly could not imagine putting that much storage on a USB link on a router with what is a technically BETA experimental firmware. I'd be worried day and night about that data just not being there some day.
If you want to put that much storage on a NAS, do yourself a favor and buy yourself a QNAP or Synology NAS. Even a used one off ebay from a few years ago for a few hundred dollars will run circles around a router based hack, offer more features, performance and stability in both the software and hardware. Why spend that much money on the disks to just have it all hanging off a usb port based hack?
And no level of RAID is going to save you in the case of some firmware bug totally trashing your file system. The RAID controller in that USB attached storage will happy write whatever garbage a firmware bug tells it to all over those disks totally trashing the data on them. If it even contains a real hardware RAID controller. A lot of those types of storage systems are simply a USB to SATA bridge with a port multiplier, relying on a proprietary driver or the OS to handle the RAID in software.
Even the QNAP / Synology SOHO type devices do not have a hardware RAID controller in them. They're doing linux software RAID. You're not likely going to be seeing real hardware RAID until you get into rack mounted storage solutions that cost in the double digit thousands of dollars.
RAID is not a backup! It is meant for either increasing performance or availability depending on the level of RAID chosen. RAID won't save you from the OS, a bug, or some malware writing all over your precious data, or a power surge nuking more than one of your drives.
I myself have two identical QNAP 4 bay devices. Both are set up identically with a total of 16TB of disks per NAS using RSYNC to sync the data changes from the master NAS to the mirror NAS nightly. If one of those NAS devices totally dies, or a disk dies, I don't have to sit there on pins and needles worrying about the rest of the RAID 5 array dying during the rebuild process, which is has been a high probability for some time with the increase in disk sizes over the years. The eventual plan is for my mirror NAS to not even live in the same house as the primary one. I have already tested having the mirror device at a remote location with the mirror device VPNed back to my home network and then rsyncing over the VPN tunnel.