SNAP 4000 Errors and Limits

[radio]

Originally Posted by blue68f100

Radio, The info Phoneinx32 say is correct.

I don't know what your problem is. We have been through this before.

Everything Phoenix32 has said about the HW in a 4000 and the 1T has been confirmed. Others have also reported problems with HD's > 250gig.

The OS has a 1T limit, due to the fact that the XFS file system is 24bit. Just because the HD Supports LBA48bit does not make it a 48bit system. The weakest link rules here.

Failure to build the raid5 array should tell you something.

You come here for help, then you disregard what we say.

Time for you to move on.

Enough said, case closed.

Blue, It certainly is time to move on. (not because of your suggestion)

It's also time for anyone thinking about buying an old snap. While you guys seem stuck on reviving a dead technology, which is fine for hobbyists, I would also have to recommend anyone thinking of using these in production to move on as well. They would be better off working with FreeNAS - even in beta.


My problem, at the moment, is your collective egos. You can't seem to admit that you were wrong. I have the proof, and I am using it. (though I'll sell it soon.) I built a RAID5 just fine - no failure as you suggest. you have to remember that this is not religion. Belief does not trump evidence. It works, and I am sorry that makes you feel bad. But for honesty sake I have to report it like it is.

I appreciate the jump start help I did get here in the early stages. This site and the info here is great for hobbyists (thought I'll have to warn people not to take it as gods word. there is much speculation and belief offered as gospel.) I offered to financially support this site, but was asked to continue posting and adding to the knowledge base instead. You also asked me to report back my results, but now that you don't like it, you are asking me to leave.

that suits me fine.

You know, I really wasn't out to hurt your feelings either. I am sorry.

[blue68f100]

If you would to look at the results, you would reconize that you are still having issues with the large drives. Other wise you would not be coming back with all the problems. All other with the 400gig hd (and 320+gig) have had problems in raid5. You must remember STABILITY IS THE KEY, with out it you can not trust the unit. This means starting and stopping, this is where a lot of problems show up. If it has to go through a 24+ hr check every time it boots, someting is wrong. The snapos also is working on a 24bit file system which clamps the capacity. 750 gig drives have worked in some units, as long as the share is under the 24 bit limit, ~ 1T. I have also done research that there are a lot of other NAS (early ones) that also have this limit. But most of those the MFG supplied upgraded firmware.

Your welcome here but with new problems that have not been addressed.

[Phoenix32]

Originally Posted by radio

While you guys seem stuck on reviving a dead technology,

Excuse me?

I was not even going to reply until I read that.

In case you haven't noticed pal, I am not trying to revive jack squat. In fact, I am using Guardian OS Units. I have one SNAP 4000 which will probably go away soon, one SNAP 1000 which I keep for playing with and due to it's small footprint, and then six Guardian OS units. So exactly how am I trying to revive a dead technology? I'm not, unless you consider trying to help those who have SNAP OS units for whatever their own reasons are (mostly money) as reviving dead technology.

You have a right to think and believe what you want. But the fact is, in this case, you are wrong, but no point trying to convince you either (I could not care less). But I do care about you putting out info that is dead on wrong and may cause someone else problems. You keep on thinking what you want. I really don't care. Honest. But do not expect me to sit by idle while you tell someone they can do something that is going to cost them money only to find out it won't work, or will work, but will have various "issues" all the time.

And, don't apologize to me, it's not needed. My feelings were not hurt even a little. But you might want to apologize to anyone who took your opinion and spent their hard earned cash only to end up with problematic SNAP 4000.


To be fair. Has anyone here put 4 x 320 GB drives in a SNAP 4000 in a 4 Drive RAID 5 array (no spares) and not had one single issue or problem? Now I do mean zero issues of any kind at all, even small ones? And I don't mean just slapped the the drives in, formatted and built a RAID 5, then called it good. I mean had it up and running a while with real usage in various situations and/or even had to rebuild the array due to a dead drive (or simulated). Anyone?

[Phoenix32]

Oooops, here's me trying to revive dead technology again...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...6266&rd=1&rd=1


Sorry Hallis...

[rpmurray]

Originally Posted by Phoenix32

Oooops, here's me trying to revive dead technology again...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...6266&rd=1&rd=1


Sorry Hallis...

You know, until I saw the picture for this auction, I never realized that the Snap 4500 came with 24 ethernet ports.

[Phoenix32]

Originally Posted by rpmurray

You know, until I saw the picture for this auction, I never realized that the Snap 4500 came with 24 ethernet ports.

You mean they don't?


LOL


(yes, I asked questions)

[Phoenix32]

Wow, like brand new, 4 x 250 GB drives, and OS 4.2.054 taboot... Not bad...