queue criticism
It’s cue.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cue
a signal (such as a word, phrase, or bit of stage business) to a performer to begin a specific speech or action
That last line is your cue to exit the stage.
I assume you were requesting a critique on your comment.
That’s weird that there are several ways to get access to the Quick Guides, and some seem to want an email.
However it doesn’t use it and takes junk (I just used a@b.com which was accepted), but sad that the form you found needed it.
But to answer your question, no I missed that link and went to “downloads” which also has the guide but doesn’t appear to require any email.
I just did a websearch and first result was a download link on their US website too which didn’t require registration.
There seems to be a lot of nonsense on here.
Err, you mean the piece of paper that came in the box, or is available to download on their website as a link without having to register?
https://www.terra-master.com/us/d6-320.html?page=menu&mid=1336
Update your DAS? What are you talking about?
The brand that runs their OS off of a USB stick inside the device
Are you alright?
If you use a reputable brand, such as TerraMaster you’ll avoid all of the scare stories you hear.
Almost everything bad seems to be along the lines of
I bought “off brand” XzzYyG from Amazon/EBay/Wish and it failed
Something like this:
https://www.terra-master.com/uk/products/homesoho-das/d6-320.html
It’ll be faster than your spinning rust anyway, as long as you have high speed ports on your mini PC.
I’ve had “trash controllers” in Orico units which rewite the drive details which makes them annoying to work with but I’ve never heard of
your drives will vanish in the middle of a write, and corrupt themselves
That sounds likes its underpowered and when the draw is up the supply can’t handle it, which could happen for internal drives if your supply isn’t up to powering enough drives.
Use a reputable brand like TerraMaster and you’ll not have those sorts of problems.
This is completely untrue.
You can get plently of performant arrays over USB. You do know how much USB 3.1 or 4 can transmit?
Enclosures often don’t cool as well so heat may degrade your disks faster as well.
DAS enclosures can do a great job of cooling by separating and not sharing the air inside a single case.
Regardless of how “clean” ReactOS is they cannot legally reverse engineer Win10 or Win11 due to the EULA (which Microsoft would enforce in court)
How would they prove the developer signed an EULA? I know I haven’t been made to use Windows since the Vista era. And even then, that was a work computer so I never agreed to anything.
The rest I agree with. Windows is trash, why bother cloning it? Wine exists to run applications that are desired but don’t have Linux equivalents.
Yep, completely agree that its an Intel limitation.
I didn’t see that about USB3 (my Intel system provides USB 3, and still has the 50 endpoint/25 device limit), I’ll take a look, however it sounds like AMD is just generally better.
It’ll be a shame to lose Quick Sync, but it’ll probably be worth it.
However this reiterates my thoughts about USB4, since it is a Thunderbolt derivative, and as mentioned in your link Thunderbolt doesn’t have these same limitations.
👍
That sounds absolutely gross.
I’ve tried to respond to everyone who have given their opinion of my set up in a top level comment to try and keep it on topic. You can respond there if you feel like you have anything to add.
I’ve tried to respond to everyone who have given their opinion of my set up in a top level comment to try and keep it on topic. You can respond there if you feel like you have anything to add.
I’ve tried to respond to everyone who have given their opinion of my set up in a top level comment to try and keep it on topic. You can respond there if you feel like you have anything to add.
I’ve tried to respond to everyone who have given their opinion of my set up in a top level comment to try and keep it on topic. You can respond there if you feel like you have anything to add.
Citation please? The spec is fine with it, its just Intel that put in artificial limitations.
It’s unfortunate that the conversation has been derailed by people advising me on “better” implementations, so should probably summerise my journey that has got me to this point.
I started home labbing and self-hosting over 25+ years ago, with a large HDD connected to my home PC, HDMI to the TV and ripping DVDs. The disk was probably PATA back then. Yeah, single disk and it probably died at some point making me realise I needed backups in future. I replaced it with a dedicated server I build in an ITX case. A four disk CHENBRO ES34069, back in the good old Athlon days. Each one of those disks was SATA directly connected to the motherboard. And it did the job, except for getting extremely hot and I had a number of disk failures over the years.
Looking back, I can’t guarentee that it was the heat from the system that caused premature failures rather than 2008 era disks just not being as reliable as they are now. But it was hot, and that could not have helped and I had a number of disks over the years that failed in various ways.
I learnt about RAID, and ADM on Linux making arrays and generally not losing any data any more.
My upgrade on that was required as I find that storage requirements outpace what I have, so it ultimately was replaced with a full tower system. A Zalman MS800. At this point I tried to go the whole way. SAS controller cards! Silverstone SAS/SATA hot swap drive bays! RAID disks!
This is when I learnt that I don’t like large RAID arrays, when scrubs took several days and either extending/upgrading/replacing a disk took forever and started using 4 disk arrays in parallel with mergerFS overlaid. Honestly that was the best discovery and its not lost me anything in over a decade.
But SAS became a hassle. I had a controller card fail at one point, so I picked up a replacement which turned out to be a fake, and I’ve had to replace an 8087 cable a couple of times. Its hot, I’ve gone through a few replacement drive bays and they’ve all had small cheap fans on the back of them that over heat, make noise, and don’t do a great job of shifting heat when its part of the same case as the rest of the computer. So I’ve investigated alternatives.
The current solution has evolved to now have 4 “TERRAMASTER D4-300” external storage devices. These are probably the best I’ve come across, they fully expose the disks to the hosts including SMART and even the full correct serial numbers. The speed is absolutely not an issue and I find the benefits of SAS have been completely overstated when dealing with 5/10GB USB connections. I can do a full scrub of a 4 disk RAIDZ over night. These have large fans on the back, and I’ve never had disks this cool when dealing with internal storage, SMART is much happier. You are allowed to have your own opinions, but honestly I’ve been using this setup for a long time and I have no regrets. It is much simpler, and the limitation is very much on the speed of the storage device rather than the type of cable.
The only issue is older Intel gimping the USB enumerator to only allow 50 endpoints, which is 25 devices (less if you have hubs), and even on newer systems they only doubled it.
Let me know why you think my set up is wrong, and I’ll explain how I’ve probably tried your way and I don’t care for it.
Nice!
The 127 endpoint limit isn’t even that hard, the spec is 127 endpoints per controller, however Intel appears to have done the dirty and restricted systems to 127, and even then you need two controllers to get that high. 😡
If AMD let’s us use multiple controllers to go higher then thats awesome, but its also following the spec.
[Edit] I’ll have to see if I can find the video.
I’m not. Intel does not let you get that high.
From Intel.
First Limitation
Fundamentally, the customer is correct. You will never be able to achieve 127 actual USB devices attached to a Host Controller (i.e. Intel system). As the customer pointed out, each USB device (USB key, keyboard, mouse, etc.) is typically counted as two endpoints (two logical USB units), and each USB hub, multiplier, or repeater is counted as another 4+ endpoints. So, it comes to about 50+ devices per each Host Controller.
With these systems it was only 25 devices total (unless you use hubs), so they introduced two controllers to allow 100+ endpoints.
It’s because of this reason that Intel added a second USB Host Controller in the majority of its Core platform chipsets. If you look at the Features page of the 8 Series Chipset ( when partnered with the 4th Gen Intel Core processor), page 39, http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/chipsets/8-series-chipset-pch-datasheet.html http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/chipsets/8-series-chipset-pch-datasheet.html, it states having “Two EHCI Host Controllers, supporting up to fourteen external USB 2.0 ports”. So, with two Host Controllers, each at 50+ device, you have a potential of connecting up to 100+ USB devices per 4th Gen Core platform system.
And thats not considering the internal hubs that split back and forward ports.
We used to have one, and it was great.
RIP Boxee.