Slashdot Mirror
Snap Appliance Snap Server 1100 NAS Device
~*77*~ writes "While taking up considerably less space than a shoebox, this little device seamlessly allows users to add additional storage to any network in less than five minutes. Today we review the Snap Appliance 80GB Snap Server 1100. This compact NAS (network attached storage) device has many great features including: 5 minute installation, a compact web and ftp server, or simply a network share. Most importantly it works in a network mixed with Windows, Netware, UNIX, Linux, and Macintosh machines... "
We've been using SNAP servers for a while now at work... Mostly pretty good experiences to report. The little boxes run some BSD derivative, support SMB/NFS/FTP/WWW/etc access to the files stored on them, and some can even run Java Servlets. They can even use a NetWare or Win NT/2K Domain to handle logins and security. We normally use them for small remote offices that don't justify a full server or for storing large rarely accessed files like aerials of the parish. Much better than storing them on a few hundred CDs that have to be tracked and stored properly.
My only real complaint is backup can be annoying due to a lack of tape drive or any real backup feature on the device itself. You'll have to write some scripts or make use of an external package on another machine to get some sort of backup procedure going.
They seem to use normal IDE drives, so they WILL eventually fail. However, Snap Appliance went ahead and replaced one of our 1100s free of charge when the drive developed errors and the software update applied incorrectly while trying to fix it. This was despite the fact that the server was no longer under warranty.
All in all, beautiful little boxen.
Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
Where's that at, anyway? While anyone can "deploy" SMB servers (either canned, home-grown, or otherwise), it doesn't make any sense at all to just add a bunch of new shares willy-nilly, fragmenting your overall storage capacity.
What WOULD make these kinds of devices make more sense would be iSCSI and the ability to dynamically expand an existing volume to use the new space over the network. I know there are some expensive SAN systems that can do this now, but iSCSI would make it a lot less expensive, using an existing or dedicated IP network to connect the devices instead of expensive fiber channel fabric.