On Thu, 7 Jun 2018, Jim Garrison wrote:
As I forgot to mention, and John Jason Jordan pointed out, the NAS
approach is better if you need to share the disk with multiple systems.
Jim,
Not an issue here. I'm clearing out excess computers. And, if I need to
access the data stored on the exter
As I forgot to mention, and John Jason Jordan pointed out, the NAS
approach is better if you need to share the disk with multiple systems.
The USB option is a 1-to-1 connection, and any sharing with other
computers would have to be over the network, with the directly
connected system acting as an
On Thu, 7 Jun 2018 08:30:44 -0700
Jim Garrison dijo:
>Different connections. NAS usually runs over Ethernet and uses NFS or
>SMB remote drive sharing protocol over TCP/IP. USB uses a totally
>different, native and much more efficient driver stack, and if capable
>of USB 3 can be pretty close to
On Thu, 7 Jun 2018, Jim Garrison wrote:
Different connections. NAS usually runs over Ethernet and uses NFS or
SMB remote drive sharing protocol over TCP/IP.
Jim,
I thought this to be the case because it makes sense that it's a network
node.
USB uses a totally different, native and much mo
On 6/7/2018 7:27 AM, Rich Shepard wrote:
> For infrequent use I want to consolidate usb-connected hard drives in a
> single case. What are the relative advantages of a regular multi-bay
> enclosure and a NAS enclosure?
Different connections. NAS usually runs over Ethernet and uses NFS or
SMB re
For infrequent use I want to consolidate usb-connected hard drives in a
single case. What are the relative advantages of a regular multi-bay
enclosure and a NAS enclosure?
Rich
___
PLUG mailing list
PLUG@pdxlinux.org
http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/
