This topic has been marked solved and closed to new posts due to inactivity. We hope you'll join the conversation by posting to an open topic or starting a new one.
I understand there some important new functionaly it OS 6.6 and I can see on my NAS that we are now all encourged to update, and I want to know if there is an updated manual under way too?
We do have the ReadyNAS Backup FAQ already covering several different backup scenarios.
Bit-rot protection inherently requires using a redundant RAID level and using a good copy of data on one disk to repair the problem on another. So the USB disk isn't protected against bit-rot on the USB disk itself even if using BTRFS.
I'm not sure on that one. Best to have that one followed up on your new thread.
Bit-rot protection for USB-disk. I just thought that the transfer from the NAS to the USB was more secured when USB is BTRFS since then checksums with the NAS (in RAID) would help. But I understand that when teh USB is disconnected then nothing protect it. But next time you mount it and make an incremental backup, could it then not also do a check (perhaps on request by the user) that what you on the backup is correct and then do the incremental backup. Or is such added functionality not that dependent on BTRFS on the backup? After all for us Mac users with Time Machine backup I can easily order a check that the current Time Machine backup is correct, but I do not know how thourough that check is and may not detect bit-rot.
Concerning my example from professional world with issues with long names of file paths it is true it was a Windows environment there. If this limiations are still there for OS 6 it might be good to state such limitations in the manual?
Yes I think we all know, and especially my professional customer mentioned, that you should never go very close to the limit of the NAS capacity, but here is a grey zone and could perhaps also be more clearer pointed out in the manual or complemented with automatic protection in the software and create a hard user limit that still give some space for the NAS internally.
Some of these thoughts perhaps are better to discuss in Ideas Exchange but I thought they at least partly relate to the update of the manual.
But next time you mount it and make an incremental backup, could it then not also do a check (perhaps on request by the user) that what you on the backup is correct and then do the incremental backup.
Independent of BTRFS, I think the ability to verify a backup is a good feature. I suggest posting it on the idea exchange (maybe also post a link to the idea on this thread).
BTRFS checksums would be one approach (the algorithm could be applied to any file system), or it could be a full verification (reading/comparing the files on the drive with the NAS). However its done, I think the files on the USB drive need to be read (to make sure they can be).
