Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)ZH
Posts
2
Comments
10
Joined
11 mo. ago

  • Stopped at my local Best Buy the other day. Needed an SSD that was locked behind glass. After attempting to get help for a half hour I ordered one on eBay from the parking lot and drove home. I've honestly tried to support brick and mortar where I can but I give up.

  • My understanding is that allows one server to present storage from multiple 'back end' servers, thus still being a single point of failure, right?

    Maybe, it could be separate shares on separate servers presented as a single 'host' by a Windows cluster, this would be more storage efficient than replication and the only single point of failure would be any given back end server that would only affect 1-2 shared folders rather than all of them, which might be acceptable. Or I could be way the hell off with my understanding of DFS....

    Edit: Did a bit more research, it seems DFS does do a redundant namespace that can handle failover. That might actually be exactly what I need. Thanks!

  • homelab @lemmy.world

    Options for SMB shares without a single point of failure.

  • I understand that, I've tried both domain=CompanyWork and domain=CompanyWork.internal in my cred file and directly in fstab both result in the permission error when mounting the TrueNAS share but work just fine when mounting a share provided by Windows Server.

  • homelab @lemmy.ml

    Looking for help with TrueNAS/AD/Linux setup.