Comments on: Buffalo LS-W1.0TGL/R1 http://vdachev.net/2008/06/12/buffalo-ls-w10tgl-r1/ Mindlog of a Freak Tue, 22 Dec 2009 22:11:46 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Dave http://vdachev.net/2008/06/12/buffalo-ls-w10tgl-r1/comment-page-1/#comment-18491 Dave Fri, 07 Nov 2008 00:23:08 +0000 http://vdachev.net/blog/?p=619#comment-18491 Valery: It plays EVERYTHING I've thrown at it. =o) Definitely glad I got it. Thanks for the heads up! Valery: It plays EVERYTHING I’ve thrown at it. =o) Definitely glad I got it. Thanks for the heads up!

]]> By: Valery Dachev http://vdachev.net/2008/06/12/buffalo-ls-w10tgl-r1/comment-page-1/#comment-17968 Valery Dachev Wed, 29 Oct 2008 19:42:13 +0000 http://vdachev.net/blog/?p=619#comment-17968 <strong>@Dave:</strong> I've got a good news for you. I've just tested Buffalo's media server with an Xbox 360 Arcade at home and the latter one finds and plays all the music from the library perfectly! However I'm not sure about DRM-protected content... :/ @Dave: I’ve got a good news for you. I’ve just tested Buffalo’s media server with an Xbox 360 Arcade at home and the latter one finds and plays all the music from the library perfectly! However I’m not sure about DRM-protected content… :/

]]> By: Valery Dachev http://vdachev.net/2008/06/12/buffalo-ls-w10tgl-r1/comment-page-1/#comment-17967 Valery Dachev Wed, 29 Oct 2008 19:35:24 +0000 http://vdachev.net/blog/?p=619#comment-17967 @Ed Prose: Yeah, if the memory of the device goes bad the chances are I'll get some bad writes on the drives before you detect the problem. Nevertheless this applies to any device you could use to back up your information. I personally keep some of that stuff in encrypted partitions on a portable hard drive as well as on my server. Still an atomic bomb could probably destroy my data... There is always a risk and it usually is inversely proportional to the price you are about to pay for securing your data. :) @Ed Prose: Yeah, if the memory of the device goes bad the chances are I’ll get some bad writes on the drives before you detect the problem. Nevertheless this applies to any device you could use to back up your information. I personally keep some of that stuff in encrypted partitions on a portable hard drive as well as on my server. Still an atomic bomb could probably destroy my data… There is always a risk and it usually is inversely proportional to the price you are about to pay for securing your data. :)

]]> By: Recent URLs tagged Nslu2 - Urlrecorder http://vdachev.net/2008/06/12/buffalo-ls-w10tgl-r1/comment-page-1/#comment-17961 Recent URLs tagged Nslu2 - Urlrecorder Wed, 29 Oct 2008 18:31:16 +0000 http://vdachev.net/blog/?p=619#comment-17961 [...] Recent public urls tagged "nslu2" → Buffalo LS-W1.0TGL/R1 [...] [...] Recent public urls tagged “nslu2″ → Buffalo LS-W1.0TGL/R1 [...]

]]> By: Ed Prose http://vdachev.net/2008/06/12/buffalo-ls-w10tgl-r1/comment-page-1/#comment-13300 Ed Prose Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:04:36 +0000 http://vdachev.net/blog/?p=619#comment-13300 Hi Valery, Understood, but the idea is to have access always, and to have redundant hard drives without redundant electronics seems incorrect. Plus, if the electronics really goes bad, it is possible that it destroys the data as well. Thanks for your input. Hi Valery,

Understood, but the idea is to have access always, and to have redundant hard drives without redundant electronics seems incorrect. Plus, if the electronics really goes bad, it is possible that it destroys the data as well.

Thanks for your input.

]]> By: Valery Dachev http://vdachev.net/2008/06/12/buffalo-ls-w10tgl-r1/comment-page-1/#comment-13297 Valery Dachev Wed, 16 Jul 2008 05:30:12 +0000 http://vdachev.net/blog/?p=619#comment-13297 <strong>@Ed Prose:</strong> If the device itself fails a replacement of the device only will be enough to boot and access your data. @Ed Prose: If the device itself fails a replacement of the device only will be enough to boot and access your data.

]]> By: Ed Prose http://vdachev.net/2008/06/12/buffalo-ls-w10tgl-r1/comment-page-1/#comment-13289 Ed Prose Wed, 16 Jul 2008 01:04:09 +0000 http://vdachev.net/blog/?p=619#comment-13289 Hi Valery, Thanks for getting back. You covered many of my concerns, but I am also concerned that the box itself would fail, not the drives, making the drives not accessible. I have laptops only, and no other SATA device, so I would need to get a sata usb adapter and need to get xfs driver software, which I am not sure works. I think I may opt for two NAS raid0 devices, it really is not that much more expensive, I just need to think about how they back each other off. Hi Valery,
Thanks for getting back. You covered many of my concerns, but I am also concerned that the box itself would fail, not the drives, making the drives not accessible. I have laptops only, and no other SATA device, so I would need to get a sata usb adapter and need to get xfs driver software, which I am not sure works. I think I may opt for two NAS raid0 devices, it really is not that much more expensive, I just need to think about how they back each other off.

]]> By: Valery Dachev http://vdachev.net/2008/06/12/buffalo-ls-w10tgl-r1/comment-page-1/#comment-13287 Valery Dachev Tue, 15 Jul 2008 23:24:43 +0000 http://vdachev.net/blog/?p=619#comment-13287 <strong>@Ed Prose:</strong> I actually don't have an idea what the problem with the older version was but I haven't had any problems with the device for the last month. As far as I know the LinkStation Pro Duo is equipped with a Marvell SATA controller with no native RAID support. RAID0 and RAID1 arrays are standard Linux arrays. I agree that the best solution is to have more than one NAS and set up a regular backup and actually keep the second NAS in a very distant location. But is it worth? If only one of the hard drive fails, the box sends an e-mail. I would then shut down the box, report the problem and wait for a replacement drive. If case both of the drives fail I suppose I would be able to take out the drives and mount each of them on a computer and rescue my data (unless the plates of both HDDs are injured). Having one box only of course is not an insurance against fire, floods, hurricanes or theft and I personally do regular backups of my most sensitive information in <a href="http://www.truecrypt.org/" rel="nofollow">True Crypt</a> volumes on a remote machine. @Ed Prose: I actually don’t have an idea what the problem with the older version was but I haven’t had any problems with the device for the last month.

As far as I know the LinkStation Pro Duo is equipped with a Marvell SATA controller with no native RAID support. RAID0 and RAID1 arrays are standard Linux arrays. I agree that the best solution is to have more than one NAS and set up a regular backup and actually keep the second NAS in a very distant location. But is it worth?

If only one of the hard drive fails, the box sends an e-mail. I would then shut down the box, report the problem and wait for a replacement drive.

If case both of the drives fail I suppose I would be able to take out the drives and mount each of them on a computer and rescue my data (unless the plates of both HDDs are injured).

Having one box only of course is not an insurance against fire, floods, hurricanes or theft and I personally do regular backups of my most sensitive information in True Crypt volumes on a remote machine.

]]> By: Ed Prose http://vdachev.net/2008/06/12/buffalo-ls-w10tgl-r1/comment-page-1/#comment-13286 Ed Prose Tue, 15 Jul 2008 18:11:56 +0000 http://vdachev.net/blog/?p=619#comment-13286 Hi Valery, Just got off the phone with tech support, they do not know if the "(3)" indicates version 3. As to the file system, they say it is xfs, I asked as I wanted to know what my options were to get to the disk if there was a failure on the box. After a bit of discussion, he said it might be better to get two separate NAS single drive units, and have the NAS boxes schedule a backup from one to the other, this way, if there was an electronic failure of the server box itself, I could still get to the data, even if it meant moving the hard drive from one box to another. This is a solution I think I may go for, as I do not need instantaneous RAID1, just want assured backup of my files over time. What are your thoughts on this? Hi Valery,
Just got off the phone with tech support, they do not know if the “(3)” indicates version 3. As to the file system, they say it is xfs, I asked as I wanted to know what my options were to get to the disk if there was a failure on the box. After a bit of discussion, he said it might be better to get two separate NAS single drive units, and have the NAS boxes schedule a backup from one to the other, this way, if there was an electronic failure of the server box itself, I could still get to the data, even if it meant moving the hard drive from one box to another. This is a solution I think I may go for, as I do not need instantaneous RAID1, just want assured backup of my files over time. What are your thoughts on this?

]]> By: Valery Dachev http://vdachev.net/2008/06/12/buffalo-ls-w10tgl-r1/comment-page-1/#comment-13285 Valery Dachev Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:18:39 +0000 http://vdachev.net/blog/?p=619#comment-13285 <strong>@Dave:</strong> What did Buffalo Tech Support respond? <strong>@Ed Prose:</strong> My box has exactly the same label on it. Unfortunately I can't tell you if "(3)" means it is version 3 as I haven't found any information about that on the Internet. However I doubt there are any older versions on sale. By the way the exact model name of my device is: "LS-WTGL/R1-V3 F/W 3.03". @Dave: What did Buffalo Tech Support respond?

@Ed Prose: My box has exactly the same label on it. Unfortunately I can’t tell you if "(3)" means it is version 3 as I haven’t found any information about that on the Internet. However I doubt there are any older versions on sale. By the way the exact model name of my device is: "LS-WTGL/R1-V3 F/W 3.03".

]]>