Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 8th Jan 2007 23:34 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 199727
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Oy vey. Have you actually read any of the articles?
There is a lot of info on the redundancy available. From (http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/whs_preview.asp)
"WHS aggregates all of the storage attached to the server into a single store pool, regardless of whether that storage is internal, external, or a combination. As you add drives to the server, the available storage pool simply increases. [...] Data is mirrored at the shared folder level, so that two copies of a folder are always stored on two different physical hard drives. It's quite different from RAID, Headrick says."






Member since:
2005-07-02
Multiple drives is preferable (if more expensive), as having data in two different places can be a bit more complicated, especially for stuff that changes (home accounting data, for example). You'd need a versioning system, or at least rsync, to manage it. It can certainly be done, but it's a bit more complex.
I got the idea that the device is destined more for centralized storage than backup anyway (though it would certainly be useful for that as well).