NASLite Network Attached Storage

www.serverelements.com
Task-specific simplicity with low hardware requirements.
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 4:16 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Request for HD-version!
PostPosted: Mon Apr 18, 2005 6:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 12:56 pm
Posts: 15
I LOVE the idea to reuse old hardware for a small, cheap, silent and energy saving server! This is true recycling!!

But the limitation to one floppy disk is a major disadvantage:
-Bootup takes ages!
-Each time the developers want to improve something they have to rechew the whole project, which takes very long and often they have to throw something else overboard
-A floppy is not a very reliable medium.
-Many things are missing through lack of space (ISA-network adaptors, DMA)
-Several versions have to be maintained: MBit, GBit, USB, CD

The USB-version is a step, but unfortunately older mainboards can not boot from USB.
And the CD version needs a CD-rom AND a floppy drive, two hardware components needed only for bootup, a waste of energy and space.

Suggestion: A HD-version. NASLite resides on disk 1 in its own partition, the remainder of the drive is for storage.
Why not?!? Changing disk1 affords manual care for its content anyway, so we also can take care of NASLite in that case. And I would happily accept that disk1 is no more a pure storage disk! I am not swapping disks between my numerous NASLite servers every day :-)

The advantages:
-Only one version to maintain!
-Enough space for all features (Mbit, GBit, DMA, USB, ISA, configuration facilities, future improvements)
-Fast bootup

What would be needed: a small installer which can boot from anything which is booteable (Floppy/CD/USB/Zip...), and can partition and format the HD. It installs NASLite from anywhere (more floppies, USB, CD, Zip) to its own partition on disk1. The configuration data is saved there too, perhaps with backup possibility.

Possible enhancement: USB, ZIP and DOC (Disk on Chip) could also be accepted as destination. That would conserve the puristic idea to separate NASLite and storage as far as possible.
Only user which have none of them available (or booteable) would use the HD "compromise", and they would be happy that they can use it better than now.

How about a poll?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 11:08 am
Posts: 225
i would much rather see a floppy/USB pair..

i.e. the floppy contains enough to mount and boot from a USB flash disk.

The USB version looks great but i just dont have spare hardware to use it (boot from USB is way newer than 90% of my hardware)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: HD version
PostPosted: Wed Apr 20, 2005 11:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2004 12:40 am
Posts: 28
Location: Tulsa, OK
You know, I could see the possibility of a version that loads on and boots from the hard drive, with a menu option to create a "recovery floppy" that can recreate the information on the HD if it becomes necessary to switch out the hard drive.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 20, 2005 1:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 11:08 am
Posts: 225
i see where you are going but IMHO one of the strongest features of NASLite (certainly by design) is that the hard disks store solely data and can be moved between installations with ease. Once you break with this model (i.e. by partitioning or installign an OS) it becomes not as slick.

I am not saying its a bad thing per say but personally i dont like to have OS and data on the same disk. I try to make sure this never happens on all my installs and has stood me in good stead over the years.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2005 6:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 12:56 pm
Posts: 15
I don´t want the "storage only" concept to be abandonned, and I am sure NASLite will always provide this. I am asking for the possibility to decide myself, if I want my server to be that way or not.

I have one private server (not USB bootable) with one HD, for me the purity rule is a disadvantage!
I have to live with the limitations of a floppy disk, Bootup from floppy takes 2 minutes (plus 20 minutes with slow network transfer because of SMART selftest), I had my first floppy read error after three days, making the boot floppy without having Linux is a nightmare, it took me 3 days to find out which version to use (many questions about this here in the forum!), I had to buy a GBit network card to have DMA support (MBit version is without, lack of space again, transfer speed below 1MB/s).

And all this only to prevent that somebody can have a tiny boot partition on disk-1? Which does not do any harm as long as the owner knows that it exists?
This does not have any advantage for the typical NASLite user who is not daily "moving disks between installations"!

There is no 12th commendment "Thou shallt not mix storage and NASLite!". Maybe it´s time for more freedom? You can if you want, but you don´t have to?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 13, 2005 1:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 1:02 am
Posts: 1
Better still a CF version! NASLite runs off a combination of CF and RAM using a CF-to-IDE adaptor. Backup to a USB memory stick or floppy. Then your OS is running on solid state rather than mechanical device. Boots faster and more compatible with older hardware.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 4:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 8:01 am
Posts: 170
Location: Staffordshire UK
[quote="fat"]i would much rather see a floppy/USB pair..

This would be my ideal version too, free up the IDE with the CD on it and away you go.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 12:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 25, 2005 5:44 pm
Posts: 6
I agree with Joaho. I definetely would not mind having NAS in my HD and I don´t need to keep changing things around here. NASlite is a great idea, but unfortunately the developers show to be "stubborn" about some things. This floppy limit for example, lead the project to use oldfashioned softaware (ext2, samba 2 instead of samba 3, etc) e make the whole idea just a toy (no offense). I had to give it up, because besides backup of files, I need to store my videos and it is not possible to watch them (not fast enough transfer speed).

So I had to setup a headless windows 98-based file server that gives me enough speed for what I want.

Another point is that in my experience the system is not so reliable (ext2) and can mess up files in case of power failure.

It is a pity, I had liked so much the project. But when we compare the new technology and resources available, (SATA, ATA 133, ready-made and almost afordable NAS drives) makes not much sense to stick with the lack of possibilities of NAS. Again, it is a pity.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 1:56 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2004 4:11 pm
Posts: 1771
Location: Server Elements
That’s an interesting prospective renatosc,

It is only natural for users to look at NASLite subjectively. After all, you are trying to satisfy a very specific need - yours. As developers however, we have to look at NASlite objectively in order to make sure that we cover the needs of as many potential users as possible.

I’m sure that you were initially attracted to NASLite due to its simplicity, ease of use and stability. That is why most people use it and like it.

That simplicity does not come easy. We have to assume low system requirements and low user proficiency. Then we have to ensure the software is portable, tolerant to hardware differences, stable and performs well given those tight restrictions.

The features you are asking may be of extreme importance to you, but are most likely to be of hindrance to someone else. If that were not the case, we’d all be running Red Hat or SuSE on all of our servers. In theory, a large distribution offers all that one may need for a fully customized solution. Except, of course, the hardware requirements are high and so is the necessary proficiency level on the part of the user.

What Server Elements tries very hard to do is to make NASLite accessible to most, without complex configuration requirements and administration. I think we’ve done that.

As far as NASLite being a toy (no offense taken), if NASLite is good enough to find a place in government agencies, educational institutions and corporate offices, then I’d say that it’s a bit more than something you play with. :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 6:27 pm 
if it's not broke, Don't fix it.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 7:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 25, 2005 5:44 pm
Posts: 6
Ok, Tony. I respect your position. The project is yours. Keep it. As I said, I`m not using it anymore. At the same time, I was not the only one asking for the same things, (that is more speed, different boot options), neither the first to raise the issues (the forum shows this).

Anyway, I ask you if it's not you who want to keep things the way YOU imagine they should be. My opinion is that any product should meet the needs of users to be successful, that's a marketing rule, I did not invent it.

I`m sorry if was unpleasant and believe me my intention was good.

Thanks anyway. I wish you lots of success.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 9:32 pm 
I feel that naslite meets its needs, in all the press it gets praise. ok it does not do every thing. but remember not every one is a techie, some people want simple, I mean all you have to do is give it a IP and configure the disks. thats it. people can just get around a microsoft os. let alone a linux distribution. once you start adding to many features you might as well go for a full distribution. no one has to use naslite and if it does not do as you require you find another tool. there are plenty about!

I for one don't want to have to fiddle around with another OS. I havent the time or the need.

as long as i can access my data, stream movies to the 2 xboxes in my house and serve another computer i am happy. before naslite all the data was on my pc, my kids would be watching movies from my pc and it would grind my computer down. I wanted a solution and it totally fitted my need.

you really cant knock a os on a floppy disk. besides its free!


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 2:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 8:01 am
Posts: 170
Location: Staffordshire UK
[quote="renatosc"] I need to store my videos and it is not possible to watch them (not fast enough transfer speed).

I haven't had any problems streaming video to my xbox.

You have to accept that it does what it's designed to do very well, however it doesn't do anything other than that, so long as you remember that you won't be disapointed, if you want more then you'll have to use something else, as renatosc seem to have done.

The Server Elements team have tried to develop a set of software that suits many different hardware applications. IMHO it's cheap to buy, easy to set up, configure and use, seems very reliable and utilisies old kit. Hopefully some of the "asked for" features in the forums will be in future editions and NASlite in its various guises will grow into a very dependable and complete network attached server OS.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group