Register for the iXsystems Community to get an ad-free experience and exclusive discounts in our eBay Store.

Path to success for system upgrades

ChrisRJ

Junior Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
20
To add my story here: I started with PCs in 1990 on a 286 with a 42 MB hard disk (Seagate ST251-1), which about one year later had issues with faulty sectors. This was a couple of years before (consumer) hard disks started to internally re-map bad sectors. This was the first and last time that I lost data. Ever since, I have been paranoid about backups (and more importantly restores).

I started with simple floppy disks for source code, spreadsheets, etc. and went on for a DAT streamer in 1996. This only lasted 3 years and after that abysmal experience I switched to a QIC streamer, which lasted until about 2008. Well, that's when I put it out of service. It was in perfect working condition but 12 GB capacity per cartridge started to be an issue. Since then I have used hard disks in various ways, since streamers have become a prohibitive upfront investment for me. I would still prefer streamers, but that is a different story.

All the people I know (incl. at work) initially think of my efforts as overkill. Until they loose 10 years of digital pictures, esp. when children are involved. That is when they are willing to invest time and money. The same goes for many companies, unfortunately. A friend told me about a malware attack on his employer about a year ago. All of a sudden there was budget for keeping backups longer than just 30 days, a properly segmented network, and other things their IT department had wanted for more than a decade. Everybody (incl. me - see above) has to learn this the hard way, I guess.

A side note on NAS gear that is typically more in the consumer space. I am currently in the process of switching to a new FreeNAS box. There were long deliberations as to whether I should go for Synology instead. The core reason why I stayed with FreeNAS is that it I have flexibility. From a usability and ease-of-use perspective I got the impression that Synology is (far?) superior. But that comes at the price of simplicity. A mass market product needs to keep support tickets under control and the only way for that is to limit people's options. And I wanted to stay flexible, even if that meant to spend more money (hardware specs are not comparable to the Synology model in question) and time for setting things up.

Finally, I am not going for TrueNAS 12 right now but start with FreeNAS 11.3 U5. Yes, I have seen and read many highly positive comments about v12 and how stable it is. But IMHO nobody can be really sure for a couple of weeks that no hidden errors exist. I work in the enterprise software space and I don't know of any customer that went into production with a x.0 version of our products. You simply don't do that.
 
Last edited:

ornias

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2020
Messages
474
Finally, I am not going for TrueNAS 12 right now but start with FreeNAS 11.3 U5. Yes, I have seen and read many highly positive comments about v12 and how stable it is. But IMHO nobody can be really sure for a couple of weeks that no hidden errors exist. I work in the enterprise software space and I don't know of any customer that went into production with a x.0 version of our products. You simply don't do that.
As discussed ealier, the x.0 version (Release) of TrueNAS 12, is basically what previously would've been 12U1. "You simply don't do that. " based on the "feeling" behind a version number is also not very rational imho. You need to verify per product what a version number means.

For example iXsystems decided to use OpenZFS 2.0 RC for TrueNAS Core, because they also changed versioning. Current OpenZFS RC is closer to what would've been ZFS-on-Linux 0.9.1 already and possibly closer in versioning to what previously would've been 0.9.2.
Yet a lot of people would've jumped the bandwagon already on 0.9.1 if it was just called that.

Versioning maters, but not every version means the same when it comes to RC statuses.

A lot of people use it for months by now, a couple of weeks more aren't going to show any new data breaking bugs (it also uses stock OpenZFS 2.0, which has a significantly bigger userbase already than TrueNAS)
 

ChrisRJ

Junior Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
20
As discussed ealier, the x.0 version (Release) of TrueNAS 12, is basically what previously would've been 12U1. "You simply don't do that. " based on the "feeling" behind a version number is also not very rational imho. You need to verify per product what a version number means.
[..]
I don't think that we fundamentally disagree on anything here. My background is, among other things, mission-critical transaction processing software (think e.g. CICS). So with the old versioning scheme I would not have switched to a new version before U2. I agree with you that a "feeling" is not the best reason for such a decision and can say with confidence that this was not the case here.

Thanks for your thoughts.
 
Top