dwyl / dwyl/learn-computer-networking
`CloudKey+` --> `UNVR` ?
- Dominant language
- No language data
- Stars
- 15
- Forks
- 0
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
Please don't read this if you don't have time to think about it ...
We currently have 5 Security Cameras monitoring the exterior of `@home`.
The feed for these cameras is recorded to the `CloudKey+` #4
which has a `1Tb` (spinning) hard drive in it.
This is currently only enough space for around 2 days worth of recordings
because the doorbell and front door camera record almost continuously to ensure they don't miss anything.
The oldest recording is automatically deleted when space is required for a new clip.
We are planning to add 4 more cameras:
2 at the rear of the house to cover the rear access
one as the door access and
one covering the rear garden.
While this is only a doubling of the number of cameras it's an _exponential_ increase in bandwidth and writing to disk.
What that means in practical terms is simple: _accessing_ the video recorded to the `CloudKey+` will be 3x slower i.e. unusable.
Soo ... I'm considering upgrading to the `Network Video Recorder` (`UNVR`)
https://eu.store.ui.com/eu/en/pro/collections/unifi-camera-security-nvr-mid-scale/products/unvr?variant=UNVR-EU
Yes this is an eye watering amount of cash for a glorified linux box with a few drive bays.
Buuuuttt ... we aren't just paying for the hardware ... we're paying for the system and _interface_ that supposedly "just works" ...
Having `RAID` storage for redundancy makes a _lot_ of sense for a security system.
The _last_ thing we want is a security "event" and then the _single_ disk fails when trying to read the data. 💭
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
Assessment
This issue has not been assessed yet.