|I'm confused by this statement. Are you talking about the various RAID options? It's possible to set up a RAID on a server, and it's possible (albeit silly) to run a NAS without RAID.|
I'm not sure why you're confused. On the face of it, my opening statement in my response was (I thought) quite clear. "I would agree with a NAS solution because it provides redundancy"
Not using RAID on a small NAS device like we are discussing here means you would have no redundancy. Ergo if follows logically you would use the aforementioned RAID capability in order to have redundancy. Since I said "because it provides redundancy", it goes without saying (or so I though) I was talking about utilizing said RAID on the NAS device.
Just to be extra clear here, when I use the term "redundancy" I'm obviously not talking about RAID 0 either. I'm talking RAID 1, 5, or 10 depending on budget and what you really need out of your device.
While in my response I was talking only about a NAS solution it's probably worth mentioning (to avoid confusing you more) that I've setup quite a few servers over the years (more than 100 but less than 200) so I'm very well aware that you can RAID a server. In fact, I can say with complete honesty I've yet to setup a server that didn't utilize a redudant RAID (or RAIDs as the case may be).
However, like wanderer I feel in this situation an actual server is unwarranted because you can get a decent SOHO level NAS device for less than the cost of a server (including drives) so I never mentioned a server.
It matters not how straight the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate;
I am the captain of my soul.