The point is you could run out of space anywhere, and if you're suggesting 50GBs is a lot and you'll never run out of space I think you're preaching to the totally wrong choir.
dr100
joined 2 years ago
That sounds like an application issue, you can run out of space locally as well (especially with the Macs that are shockingly stingy with the storage in the basic configurations and cost tons to buy the devices with more, and the SSDs were soldered even when they were more like PCs than phones). Backups wouldn't help to recover some work that was never saved.
These drives have been on the market since early 2021, sure they're still kind of new but with 5 years warranty (and they decided since recently to actually offer warranty to consumers in Europe too) shouldn't be that much of a risk.
It's probably the cheapest 20TB Seagate, with what it could be replaced, with something more expensive (not that there would be much difference)?
He he, one of the drives that started SMRgate. At least it should have 3 years of warranty, but you might have trouble to get it in your region.
NAS drives are the "shut up about your disk being slow, your gigabit is even slower" category (back when they were introduced most NASes couldn't even fill up the gigabit, if they had it at all). That is if anyone asks how they're different from the "DAS" and "Server" category. That somehow the marketing was so successful that now they're considered superior to the others is another story.
As usual the answer is of course rclone. It even has --drive-skip-gdocs switch. Just rclone move --drive-skip-gdocs gdrive_remote:whatever_directory_if_any_at_all some_local_place
Are we counting here only the submarined ones? Because I don't see the Archive ones where they are starting with "key features" "Host aware, optimized for SMR performance and capable of ZAC command support". Sure, one might argue these were folded into the (OG of submarining) Barracuda Compute line, but still they're different drives.
That's somehow fine, as there is a small seed of a real issue (although it's on the power supply side not on the drive side, and it's easy to understand and to contain) but to have people scaring themselves on Internet about 3.5" drives with USB directly on the PCB, even if nobody ever has seen one in the whole history of the universe, but you know just in case, like they would be appearing like some mutating viruses, and even more PEOPLE TRICKING THEMSELVES after reading all this fear mongering that "I really really feel like I've gotten one before" it's absolutely next level.
people told me it wouldn't
It is beyond belief how misinformation gets propagated over Internet, at least here it's something more subtle, but it's really weird how people constantly come asking about 3.5" if they are shuckable at all (as in if the internal drive is "normal", not that they would want the data, they'd like to just shuck the drive from the start). What's more people even manage to gaslit themselves that somehow in the past they've had personally some 3.5" external with the USB directly on the PCB!
I started worrying about the file integrity of these transfers since synology really doesn't tell you what files failed and etc.
I am sure any failed write or read operation on the NAS will be presented to the OS mounting that network drive, and then to the application doing the copy or whatever other operation.
Can I use Teracopy to verify files that are already transferred that didn't use Teracopy?
Not sure if this file manager has a "compare" feature (I guess it should?) but Far Manager (free and open source) for example does it with F11/Advanced Compare/select also "contents", maybe also "Display a message if no differences were found" and let it run (it takes of course longer than just checking date and/or size).
Give it a full read, which you should anyway to check your backups?