If you’re doing regular backups, an SSD would be totally fine I think, since it’s getting power reapplied to it regularly. maybe use ZFS or a filesystem that protects against bit rot?
USB 3.0 caps out at 5Gbit per second, which is 1Gbit short of Gen3 SATA. USB 3.1 bumps up to 10Gbit which would mean likely no bandwidth limitation if you were to run a 3.1 capable adapter and machine, or if you were at 3.0, it would be a relatively small loss. Also, anecdotally, I’ve spun up 16 TB Seagate hard disks (spinning rust) with USB to SATA adapters, so I imagine it would work and wouldn’t be as cursed as it looks :3
edit: picture looks like an SSD with a USB port, not a SATA SSD. My above rant applies to SATA SSDs, not USB SSDs like the above.
If you’re doing regular backups, an SSD would be totally fine I think, since it’s getting power reapplied to it regularly. maybe use ZFS or a filesystem that protects against bit rot?
USB 3.0 caps out at 5Gbit per second, which is 1Gbit short of Gen3 SATA. USB 3.1 bumps up to 10Gbit which would mean likely no bandwidth limitation if you were to run a 3.1 capable adapter and machine, or if you were at 3.0, it would be a relatively small loss. Also, anecdotally, I’ve spun up 16 TB Seagate hard disks (spinning rust) with USB to SATA adapters, so I imagine it would work and wouldn’t be as cursed as it looks :3
edit: picture looks like an SSD with a USB port, not a SATA SSD. My above rant applies to SATA SSDs, not USB SSDs like the above.