I also like the technology potential - the question I am asking myself is what use to put it to where there is real demand.
Yes - it is a cloud SAN. And it could easily be bundled with a software iSCSI stack in a virtual machine image as a virtual cloud storage gateway appliance for private datacenters.
But for enterprise, I don't see the use case as primary storage ie. as the underlying storage for a DB. More likely as 'near-line' or archival storage where it is retained in a form that is readily mounted and accessible using standard FS api's for indexing, data mining etc.
As I've been focused on consumer, I haven't done enough research into the comparable cost against other archival mechanisms like tape.
When I built it, I guess I was inspired by addressing my own pain points: I didn't have a flexible, easily interfaced data protection system that automatically made sure I had a copy of my files offsite. Like having the equivalent of a massive offsite external USB drive.
I also wanted a solution that kept my files 'live' - rather than locked up in some arcane backup application image.
* Thanks for the feedback on the terms around security - will take this into account.
* Encryption is AES 256 on-the-fly - so it's encrypted before it hits local storage or remote storage - and it uses SSL for the transfer.
* The 256 Tb capacity is really just a way of moving the upper limit on capacity so that users don't have to worry about exhausting the available space in the volume - something that file-based solutions don't need to worry about. Users can choose whatever size volumes they want.
Yes - it is a cloud SAN. And it could easily be bundled with a software iSCSI stack in a virtual machine image as a virtual cloud storage gateway appliance for private datacenters. But for enterprise, I don't see the use case as primary storage ie. as the underlying storage for a DB. More likely as 'near-line' or archival storage where it is retained in a form that is readily mounted and accessible using standard FS api's for indexing, data mining etc. As I've been focused on consumer, I haven't done enough research into the comparable cost against other archival mechanisms like tape.
When I built it, I guess I was inspired by addressing my own pain points: I didn't have a flexible, easily interfaced data protection system that automatically made sure I had a copy of my files offsite. Like having the equivalent of a massive offsite external USB drive. I also wanted a solution that kept my files 'live' - rather than locked up in some arcane backup application image.
* Thanks for the feedback on the terms around security - will take this into account.
* Encryption is AES 256 on-the-fly - so it's encrypted before it hits local storage or remote storage - and it uses SSL for the transfer.
* The 256 Tb capacity is really just a way of moving the upper limit on capacity so that users don't have to worry about exhausting the available space in the volume - something that file-based solutions don't need to worry about. Users can choose whatever size volumes they want.