Posts made by EddieJennings

@NerdyDad Did my math incorrect before. Average growth of the total storage used on the NAS is 44% / year.

@NerdyDad The largest of folders has grown about 150% each year for the last several, which has prompted me to look at more data.

Determining storage usage since the beginning of time for our NAS (2010) to get an idea of possible storage requirements in the future.

Found this on Reddit: http://www.computerworld.com/article/2527153/it-management/opinion--the-unspoken-truth-about-managing-geeks.html Old, but good.

At D&D

Back to reading DNS and Bind book.

Yum

Waiting for oil change, tire rotation, and alignment at Toyota.

@BRRABill Once you make the MX record change, make sure you keep MDaemon up for a bit until you're sure the MX change has propagated and MDaemon is no longer receiving traffic.

We migrated from MDaemon to Exchange Online a couple of years ago. It was a pretty smooth process -- especially using the IMAP migration for preserving mailbox contents.

Finally heading home.

@EddieJennings And growth? 500 GB in about 6 years (which I believe is the age of the NAS and its drives).

@Texkonc Yeah, I know I can't have 5 in a RAID 10. Currently we're using under 500 GB of this storage, so losing that drive isn't significant. Once my current two hair-on-fire esque tasks are done, I'll get on figuring out the procedure.

Wealth of knowledge has been gained in the last few minutes -- in particular how long it would take to resilver an array, which puts into perspective how dangerous RAID 5 is.

@scottalanmiller The chance of failure on the resilver is what frightens me, which, contrary to what I posted a couple of minutes ago, makes me want to make the drive swap happen when I redo the RAID as RAID 10. For that matter, I'll also look and see what the cost would be to add drives to the server that connects to the NAS via iSCSI and just have the data stored locally.

@Texkonc I have one in stock already, and I agree with you and @DustinB3403 it would be wiser to go ahead and take care of this now. Especially since I don't have a solid idea of when I can get to the project of getting off the RAID 5.

@Texkonc 3 TB (WD Red)

This will highlight my inexperience with dealing with a hard drive issue before a hard drive has actually died, but I figure I have to learn somewhere, and why not use Mangolassi

I have a Synology NAS with 5 drives in a RAID 5. Yes, I know how terrible RAID 5 is -- it's what I've inherited, and it's on my list of projects to change. The raid is not degraded, and the SMART status for one drive is "normal;" however, within Health Info, this drive is showing it has 119 bad sectors. What concerns me is that 53 of these bad sectors have surfaced in the last month.

Since this drive isn't becoming any healthier, it's clear it should be replaced. The question is when. It would make sense to swap the drive at the time that I make the change to RAID 10; however (since all of my experience is a drive is living or dead -- no experience with the stages of death), would it be wiser to go ahead a swap the drive? I ask since, in my experience, planned projects often get off-set by months due to other hair-on-fire tasks that tend to appear.

Back to working on editing a PDF.

@scottalanmiller Unless the game is Project 1999

@scottalanmiller Correct. It just added to the fun to explaining why we needed "so many" cores to those who write the check.