AssfaultJunkies.com

StrippleT wrote: Sun Mar 23, 2025 11:58 am Nice rack! I like the fiber connection between your switches. One might say overkill, but if its worth doing its worth overdoing right?

Thanks. The SFP+ cable ended up being pretty being necessary. The first 10 RJ45 ports can do 10G but those last two are only 1G (IIRC). So to link the switches at 10G the SFP+ was necessary.

The rack itself was actually a project too. I couldn't find a rack that would fit where it was going. So I ordered a two post one that would be large enough to modify, hacked it up, and welded it back together as a 4 post. Doesn't need to be perfect, just functional:

Marked for cutting:


All assembled, original configuration:


In its latest form I did mount it to the wall as well to take a bit of the load off of the shelf.

Starting my storage upgrade, no thanks to WD. Apparently they have a problem with consumers buying their hard drives. So now I have a stack of retail boxes and some not so nice words for WD. It's not my fault I need just a few drives for my home use.

why so many boxes?

Aaron Coomer (3.504) wrote: Thu Apr 03, 2025 4:01 pmwhy so many boxes?

Lots of drives, and space:



In that NAS they are in groups of 8, as long as no more than 2 drives fail in a group of 8, no data should be lost. So in theory up to 4 drives can fail, and they drives can just be replaced without data loss. You can do more redundancy, but that's a happy medium without giving up too much total storage space.

Currently my main desktop keeps a 26 and 24 TB drive in it, my son's PC has a 22 TB and a 18 TB.



In those PCs we use those drives to backup each other, then we backup to the NAS. The important stuff is also backed up to the HTPCs in the house as well, as well as externals, and backed up off-site as well.

that is so much space! lol!