Oh gosh, so I wrote this down despite telling myself not to waste any space in the forum. But I could not get a clear anwser from the world-wide-web or searching trough the forum.
I have a hw raid w/bbu & flash backup + APC. The hw-r controller supports "data consistency check"
and 15x8tb=96tb disks spinning in a raid 6, "I know some of you will tell me to go nested raid 50/60" but previously I had 15x4tb for 2 years no problems, rebuild time was equal to 24-32 hours. + I have lots of cold-spares.
Should I go ReFS or stay NTFS formatting the new volume?
I really want the longer file-names and character support. I dont care for the ntfs-deduplication feature or compression.
The volume will mostly consist of 1-2 vms and act as a video archive storagepod.
I know it's safer to go with ntfs. Will using refs with this setup cause a premature-failure or mental meltdown later because of a X or Y issue?
I have a hw raid w/bbu & flash backup + APC. The hw-r controller supports "data consistency check"
and 15x8tb=96tb disks spinning in a raid 6, "I know some of you will tell me to go nested raid 50/60" but previously I had 15x4tb for 2 years no problems, rebuild time was equal to 24-32 hours. + I have lots of cold-spares.
Should I go ReFS or stay NTFS formatting the new volume?
I really want the longer file-names and character support. I dont care for the ntfs-deduplication feature or compression.
The volume will mostly consist of 1-2 vms and act as a video archive storagepod.
I know it's safer to go with ntfs. Will using refs with this setup cause a premature-failure or mental meltdown later because of a X or Y issue?
Last edited: