Per Char Jackson:
Data redundancy, however, is quite secondary. You can designate any number
of folders that you want to be redundant and DriveBender will quietly create
two copies of those folders, making sure that the two copies reside on
different physical drives. I suppose you could designate every folder to be
a redundant folder, but that halves the storage space.

One appeal of both of these products is that I can probably run them
under my old WHS license or one of my spare XP licenses - i.e. I don't
have to spring for another Windows 7 or 8.1 license.

At what level does DriveBender mirror redundant folders to different
physical drives?

e.g. Suppose I have a folder called "B" with subfolders "DVDs_NetFlix",
"Streamed_HBO", "Streamed_NetFlix"... and so-forth.

And under each of those folders are hundreds of individual folders - one
for each movie....and maybe multiple subfolders per movie.

Obviously "B" is going to be huge - as in tens of TB.... and the average
movie's folder is going to be about 4 gigs.

There's more, but you get the idea....

Given redundancy for all folders, are those huge top-level folders going
to be a problem ?


I am looking at SnapRaid right now.... Trying to find some feature that
makes it preferable to DriveBender for my use. But, for something like
this, I think I am partial to paid applications (i.e. DriveBender) over
freebies like SnapRaid.

Do you know anybody who uses SnapRaid ?

58 Terabytes ??? Wow....

Are you using redundancy in your implementation of DriveBender ?

How are you physically managing all those drives?

- Multiple SATA cards ?
- Some sort of backplane box ?

All I have right now is a large tower case and have it maxed out with 13
drives - but changing drives is a chore and I'm stuck at 13.

--
Pete Cresswell