[znpy]

> Most people have no better than 1Gb/s ethernet available in their house anyway

This is partially true. Most people have no better than 1Gb/sec per single computer. That means that a single pc using the full 1Gb/sec would saturate the nas network I/O and degrade performances for all other clients.

Which may or may not be okay... You just know to be aware of that.

[dsr_]

I keep saying backup, and other people keep re-saying NAS. These are different.

A NAS can serve as a backup.

Not all backups are suitable as a NAS.

Now, let me restate: Most people have no networks capable of significantly more than 1Gb/s between two hosts in their house. Complaining that a backup server is also attached at 1Gb/s is not going to cause people to discover that they have already purchased 10Gb/s switches, or LACP switches, or even acquire 2.5Gb/s switches.

Of the people who have 10Gb/s switches in their house, approximately none of them are going to look at this very low cost, low performance, low power system and say "yes! this is my new primary backup system!"

[toast0]

LACP switches aren't too bad. I picked up a pair of 16-port switches with vlan and LACP (1-4 ports) via web interface for around $100 combined.

2.5G or 10G switching is still too expensive for me.