|
It depends on the RAID configuration. I know RAID 5 can reconstruct from the loss of a single drive, as I've done that with our external backup (4 1TB drives in a RAID 5 config, giving about 2.5TB usable space).
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Mine's also running 4*1TB in RAID 5, for a total of 2.67TB (2945578 MB according to it)
It's working fine to reconstruct on the fly, it's just I don't always trust software so I want confirmation that I can slam a new HDD in there and it'll format it, and resync without destroying the existing data. It's not a new NAS - about 5 years old judging by the software revision date - so I just want the "security blanket" of knowing the data is safe! 
New 1TB HDD and a 4TB USB3.0 drive ordered (just in case, never hurts to have more storage than you need), and the manufacturers are "coming back to me in 24 hours" with an answer.
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: I just want the "security blanket" of knowing the data is safe!
Same here. Our external hard drive is actually a third level of backup, hanging off our backup server. I've even got spare hard drives for the thing. It's about 5 years old, and we've had 3 of the 4 drives fail in the last couple of years.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: I don't always trust software so I want confirmation that I can slam a new HDD in there...
Sure... abuse the hardware by slamming it around then blame the software!
OriginalGriff wrote: Mine's also running 4*1TB in RAID 5, for a total of 2.67TB
I recently setup a Synology system with 2*4TB in RAID 1 for a total of 4TB. Works like a chimp champ!  So far... 
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. ~ George Washington
|
|
|
|
|
It sounds very much to me like this is an excuse for new hardware!
Regards,
Rob Philpott.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the only new stuff is the 4TB USB, the other just brings my backup system back up to proper operation.
And having a 4TB so I can copy the whole backup system onto one drive does make sense - my largest USB at present is 2TB...
Yeah, OK, you got me. The 4TB is a toy... 
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, Look on the bright side! Atleast you're not Ginger!
Simon Lee Shugar (Software Developer)
www.simonshugar.co.uk
"If something goes by a false name, would it mean that thing is fake? False by nature?" By Gilbert Durandil
|
|
|
|
|
I think that Visual Basic should be shown off for its beauty and elegance.
Here is a sample of what it can do - that no other language can do:
Private Sub AlbumListPopulate()
Try
AlbumsList.ItemsSource = New List(Of Image)
For Each AlbumName In Pictures.Albums
Try
AlbumsList.ItemsSource.Add _
(
New Image With
{
.Height = 150,
.Width = 150,
.Source = RotateStream _
(
Pictures.Album(AlbumName).Picture,
Pictures.Album(AlbumName).Angle
)
}
)
Catch
End Try
Next
Catch
End Try
End Sub
|
|
|
|
|
|
What about that can't be done in C#? 
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just because you don't need the extra keyword doesn't mean that C# can't do it:
new Image
{
Height = 150,
Width = 150,
Source = RotateStream
(
Pictures.Album[AlbumName].Picture,
Pictures.Album[AlbumName].Angle
)
}
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
That code would fail as the scopes would be confused
|
|
|
|
|
No it wouldn't.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
VB
New image with {.height = height}
C#
New image {height = height}
second one fails
|
|
|
|
|
Colborne_Greg wrote: second one fails
No, it doesn't.
https://dotnetfiddle.net/J0N7Mm[^]
using System;
public class Program
{
public static void Main()
{
int height = 100;
var image = new Image { height = height };
Console.WriteLine("The image's height is {0}.", image.height);
}
}
public class Image
{
public int height { get; set; }
}
Output: The image's height is 100.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Haha 
Make it simple, as simple as possible, but not simpler.
|
|
|
|
|
Height = height breaks readability rules
Having the period in visual basic easily allows the reader of the code to know the scope of the object, which is not so obvious
|
|
|
|
|
If you're used to working in a case-sensitive language, the difference between Height and height is pretty obvious.
And if you're that worried about it, you can always call your variable something else!
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
I have a habit of avoiding case sensitive languages as it creates more problems, then the advantage you gave
|
|
|
|
|
The way you are making this statement is theological, not theoretical. In this audience, if you want that statement to actually stand, you'll have to go into great detail as to WHY you think that.
I've been working in case sensitive languages for 30 years, without any problems I can think of regarding the language itself. Humans can mess up any language, regardless of syntactic richness, protections, etc. That is because the language only enforces syntactic correctness.. and most issues with code lie in either algorithm design or overall architectural design, which no language can protect you from no matter how rich.
|
|
|
|
|
If you studied languages you would know that opinions are not religion but thanks.
Here is am example a large amount of new programmers make
int64 Height = 150;
int64 width = 150;
When the programmer uses Height and Width, the Width has a underline, and because of the number of lines in the file the programmer creates a new variable int64 Width = 150;
While this one programmer is using the uppercase Width his peers are using the lowercase width.
Is that clear enough for you,
Sorry I assumed you had enough experience to know the issues with dealing with case sensitive variables.
|
|
|
|
|
Seriously?
You are using this is a reason to disparage case sensitivity?
This same example goes for case insensitive languages.. all it takes is one programmer using 'width', while another uses something like 'wdth', and we have exactly the same issue. I've seen this so please don't say it isn't possible. Beginning programmers cease being beginners when they start looking at the bigger picture and trying to understand that things like this are possible. Which language they use is inconsequential to that understanding. The issue is one of rigor.. not some language feature.
You'll have to try MUCH harder than this to be convincing.
And note I have no bone to pick with VB. It has driven a lot of business application development and TOTALLY has its place. Its the 'new Cobol'.. another language much disparaged by many but quite useful in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
A requirement of programming for me is to use whole words, anyone writing wdth would be fired.
Considering the use of full words the with block becomes extremely important for readability.
Since the adoption of full words and with blocks we have dropped the use of comments, greatly increasing productivity.
Even when we use C# because some of my own programmers have more experience in that one language, so even when we use it having to make sure a variable is typed correctly can hold up experienced C# programmers for lazy mistakes, that simply do not happen in VB. So yes seriously.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
