I repeat, nothing in what I have said goes against buying 4TB drives if they are the sweet spot. Last time I checked, 4TB drives could hold 1TB of data…
What I AM saying is unnecessary is provisioning 30-40TB of usable storage!
As far as RAID is concerned, RAID is not a backup. The main benefit of RAID is it maintains availability of a system in the event of disk failure. From the original post, I don’t get the impression availability is a significant concern. In terms of backups, RAID should not be a factor.
Even RAID 1, the simplest mirror RAID option, requires additional code or hardware to implement. This is extra places for bugs or failures to happen. If availability is not a concern, and you have a suitable, robust, tested, backup system in place, what benefit are you gaining? Even if RAID 1 is worthwhile, you don’t need a NAS to implement it!
To go back to the numbers from the original post, ~1050 images, with the largest being 600MB, gives 600GB as a rough upper limit. This is tiny by modern digital photography standards. I am questioning the suitability of setups designed for photographers shooting that many pictures in a day, that much data in a week. Yes, they would work, but in terms of capacity they are significant overkill.
What I AM saying is unnecessary is provisioning 30-40TB of usable storage!
As far as RAID is concerned, RAID is not a backup. The main benefit of RAID is it maintains availability of a system in the event of disk failure. From the original post, I don’t get the impression availability is a significant concern. In terms of backups, RAID should not be a factor.
Even RAID 1, the simplest mirror RAID option, requires additional code or hardware to implement. This is extra places for bugs or failures to happen. If availability is not a concern, and you have a suitable, robust, tested, backup system in place, what benefit are you gaining? Even if RAID 1 is worthwhile, you don’t need a NAS to implement it!
To go back to the numbers from the original post, ~1050 images, with the largest being 600MB, gives 600GB as a rough upper limit. This is tiny by modern digital photography standards. I am questioning the suitability of setups designed for photographers shooting that many pictures in a day, that much data in a week. Yes, they would work, but in terms of capacity they are significant overkill.