Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions
-
@geertcourmacher
As long as you're aware of the situation - which it sounds like you now are - then using Windows is fine because you have made an informed decision. -
I now have Win10 and CentOS on 2 usb sticks; I removed the 2.5" boot drive and only have the future Raid drives hocked to the controller.
I will now use the Adaptec Raid Bios utility to set up the Raid, following your instructions. Can this be independent from whatever OS I will eventually use or should I change settings accordingly?
-
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
I now have Win10 and CentOS on 2 usb sticks; I removed the 2.5" boot drive and only have the future Raid drives hocked to the controller.
I will now use the Adaptec Raid Bios utility to set up the Raid, following your instructions. Can this be independent from whatever OS I will eventually use or should I change settings accordingly?
It should be independent. If it relies on an OS it is something called fake RAID.
-
Oh no, it's independent in that sense. I was referring to whether stripe size or any other setting within the Adaptec Raid Utility would respond better/worse to either OS.
-
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
Oh no, it's independent in that sense. I was referring to whether stripe size or any other setting within the Adaptec Raid Utility would respond better/worse to either OS.
No, that's a file and file system interaction, not one of the operating system.
-
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
I will now use the Adaptec Raid Bios utility to set up the Raid, following your instructions. Can this be independent from whatever OS I will eventually use or should I change settings accordingly?
Yes, hardware RAID happens in hardware completely. Once the hardware RAID encapsulation is complete, the OS simply sees the resulting drive. It's identical to having a single hard drive in a machine and dual booting.
-
Thanks for all the help so far!
In the Raid controller Bios I realized two things:
- The Firmware is not the latest, but very close to it; 18937 (Feb 2012) vs the latest release 18948 (May 2012). Is an update recommended or just an unecessary risk? No Data or arrays are created yet.
- All of the WD drives are recognized as Speed 1.5G, vs the HGST one with 3.0G. Is that the Sata speed, 1 and 2? Because all drives should be 6Gb/s actually, and while the controller only goes as far as 3Gb/s it shouldn't be just 1.5GB/s. Weirdly at first 2 of the WD Red's were recognized correctly.
In case you wonder why I used CN1 and CN3, that's because the other 2 are currently blocked by the hd-sliders (I could remove those plastic bits though, if necessary).
The other thing I am uncertain is whether I should change anything in the general controller configuration; I'll attach a screen of the options.
When it comes to the Array configuration (I haven't yet started), the suggestion was to go with 4KB stripe size, correct? I can only start at 16, all the way up to 1024.
I am also uncertain as to the 2 remaining options here, Read Caching and Write Caching. The last (Create RAID via) has already been answered (A: Quick Init).
-
@coliver said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
@scottalanmiller said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
@coliver said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
May be thinking of Fedora? Which is what CentOS/RHEL are derived from.
Fedora is a few versions ahead, not behind. It's RHEL that is behind in that case.
Right, that's what I assumed @wirestyle22 was referencing.
Sorry I've been super busy. I worded that incorrectly. Versioning being 48 hours behind. Yes it's the same product.
-
@Dashrender said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
@scottalanmiller said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
I'll at least start an installation with one of your recommendations, either on the server now are as a second boot option on my work pc. CentOS would also be good as a server system, or was this a general recommendation to be paired with XenServer?
I'd like to start small with only what's necessary, if that makes sense. If i find it easier than anticipated, I can still go further.Skipping XenServer will often make for "more work". I realize that this is for home and not business so the strong guidance of "always virtualize" still has to be tempered with "do what you are happy with doing." But some of the reasons that we say that everything should be virtual is that it makes things easier, not harder. Technically it is "doing more", but only technically.
Exactly. For example, when you reboot an OS that's installed on physical hardware, you have to reboot the hardware as well as the software. My IBM server takes over 7 mins to initialize the hardware. But, if I'm virtualized that time is zero or near zero. When I reboot a VM, I see a BIOS screen presented by the hypervisor and pop - my OS is booting. Also through the hypervisor I can mount ISOs for booting and troubleshooting. The hypervisor allows me to create virtual hardware to the VM so I don't have to worry about creating real DVDs or USB flash drives with installers on them. Another awesome advantage, backups. The VMs are just giant files to the hypervisor. If a VM is shutdown, you can just copy it anywhere you want, just like any other file.
Yes all of this. @geertcourmacher This also creates a single point of failure for multiple computers instead of one in the case of hardware failure. Most things aren't absolute. There are always advantages and disadvantages which is why you have multiple options. Sometimes the disadvantage is literally only increased cost but it's superior in every other way.
-
@wirestyle22 said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
@Dashrender said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
@scottalanmiller said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
I'll at least start an installation with one of your recommendations, either on the server now are as a second boot option on my work pc. CentOS would also be good as a server system, or was this a general recommendation to be paired with XenServer?
I'd like to start small with only what's necessary, if that makes sense. If i find it easier than anticipated, I can still go further.Skipping XenServer will often make for "more work". I realize that this is for home and not business so the strong guidance of "always virtualize" still has to be tempered with "do what you are happy with doing." But some of the reasons that we say that everything should be virtual is that it makes things easier, not harder. Technically it is "doing more", but only technically.
Exactly. For example, when you reboot an OS that's installed on physical hardware, you have to reboot the hardware as well as the software. My IBM server takes over 7 mins to initialize the hardware. But, if I'm virtualized that time is zero or near zero. When I reboot a VM, I see a BIOS screen presented by the hypervisor and pop - my OS is booting. Also through the hypervisor I can mount ISOs for booting and troubleshooting. The hypervisor allows me to create virtual hardware to the VM so I don't have to worry about creating real DVDs or USB flash drives with installers on them. Another awesome advantage, backups. The VMs are just giant files to the hypervisor. If a VM is shutdown, you can just copy it anywhere you want, just like any other file.
Yes all of this. @geertcourmacher This also creates a single point of failure for multiple computers instead of one in the case of hardware failure. Most things aren't absolute. There are always advantages and disadvantages which is why you have multiple options. Sometimes the disadvantage is literally only increased cost but it's superior in every other way.
@wirestyle22 said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
@Dashrender said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
@scottalanmiller said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
I'll at least start an installation with one of your recommendations, either on the server now are as a second boot option on my work pc. CentOS would also be good as a server system, or was this a general recommendation to be paired with XenServer?
I'd like to start small with only what's necessary, if that makes sense. If i find it easier than anticipated, I can still go further.Skipping XenServer will often make for "more work". I realize that this is for home and not business so the strong guidance of "always virtualize" still has to be tempered with "do what you are happy with doing." But some of the reasons that we say that everything should be virtual is that it makes things easier, not harder. Technically it is "doing more", but only technically.
Exactly. For example, when you reboot an OS that's installed on physical hardware, you have to reboot the hardware as well as the software. My IBM server takes over 7 mins to initialize the hardware. But, if I'm virtualized that time is zero or near zero. When I reboot a VM, I see a BIOS screen presented by the hypervisor and pop - my OS is booting. Also through the hypervisor I can mount ISOs for booting and troubleshooting. The hypervisor allows me to create virtual hardware to the VM so I don't have to worry about creating real DVDs or USB flash drives with installers on them. Another awesome advantage, backups. The VMs are just giant files to the hypervisor. If a VM is shutdown, you can just copy it anywhere you want, just like any other file.
Yes all of this. @geertcourmacher This also creates a single point of failure for multiple computers instead of one in the case of hardware failure. Most things aren't absolute. There are always advantages and disadvantages which is why you have multiple options. Sometimes the disadvantage is literally only increased cost but it's superior in every other way.
Virtual really has no downsides, though. The "single point of risk" is misleading because that's an emotional way of looking at it and empirical. One of the most important reasons that we use virtualization always is because it makes those workloads safer, it doesn't increase risk. Sure, it "adds a point of risk" but it vastly offsets this by making tons of other points safer. This is why terms like "Single Point of Failure" are dangerous - they make people panic over something that might be safe and make them see having two of something as safe even when its dangerous. It's an emotional way to view risks and very dangerous.
Virtualization is not a pro/con situation. It's just pro.. pro... pros. It's always free, so there is no cost. It improves a lot of things with only nominal negatives. There are very important reasons why you never talk about other options... because no one should be led to believe that there is a use case where not having virtualization is acceptable. That's not to say that at home you can't do whatever you want, of course you can. But even at home you should recognize that doing something without virtualization is risky just for the sake of.. whatever it is making you want to do that.
-
So.... to what Scott just said, you should get a third USB stick and get a copy of XenServer.
Another advantage of using XenServer, after you install XenServer on the hardware, you can work from anywhere that has network connectivity to the system. So if this box is going to live in a corner in the basement, you can install it, and leave it there... then go to your real workspace and remote connect to it and work as if you were sitting at the console.
-
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
Thanks for all the help so far!
In the Raid controller Bios I realized two things:
- The Firmware is not the latest, but very close to it; 18937 (Feb 2012) vs the latest release 18948 (May 2012). Is an update recommended or just an unecessary risk? No Data or arrays are created yet.
When installing something new, always start with the latest and greatest drivers/firmware possible. If during deployment you find that something doesn't work, you downgrade, but there is no reason to ever start a project at less than the most recent except as stated above.
-
@Dashrender said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
Thanks for all the help so far!
In the Raid controller Bios I realized two things:
- The Firmware is not the latest, but very close to it; 18937 (Feb 2012) vs the latest release 18948 (May 2012). Is an update recommended or just an unecessary risk? No Data or arrays are created yet.
When installing something new, always start with the latest and greatest drivers/firmware possible. If during deployment you find that something doesn't work, you downgrade, but there is no reason to ever start a project at less than the most recent except as stated above.
This ^^^^
-
OH, I should toss this on the fire since we're talking about larger partitions. XS has a limitation in that it can only present 2 TB worth of storage in a single chunck to a VM at a time.
I don't have a better way to say that at the moment... but I do need to add - each VM can have as many 2 TB chucks offered to it as you want to provide.
So in a 10 TB system, you could create a 100 GB VHD for Windows to be installed into. Then create four 2 TB VHDs and a 1.9 TB. Once inside windows, you can span all of these (windows will see them as drives) together into one large drive for the system to use.
-
Ok, so firmware upgrade first.
Then array creation. Any hints on the issues above with the drives being recognized as too slow? (Possible chance step 1 will rectify this, though).
Regarding the many settings in the controller config; no changes from default?
And stripe size? If the suggestion was 4, 16 would be the closest to choose. Yet, that would be the lowest of the options and I have larger files.Third, OS choice. Still uncertain and only vague understanding of what VM does. Would XS run on top of CentOS or concurrently?
If I just wanted the array up and running, could I actually change the OS later on? (I guess this would assume OS installation not on the array). If the controller is doing all the work, this shouldn't be impossible, no? But I guess in practice, Windows will not use the same filesystem. If it worked the other way around (CentOS, XS being able to read NTFS), though, then I could familiarize myself with all of your suggestions on another PC, and then make the switch on the array. -
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
Third, OS choice. Still uncertain and only vague understanding of what VM does. Would XS run on top of CentOS or concurrently?
Neither. Your hypervisor runs on the bare metal. Then you install CentOS on top of that. OS always on top, never underneath.
-
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
Third, OS choice. Still uncertain and only vague understanding of what VM does. Would XS run on top of CentOS or concurrently?
The use of hypervisor (XS in this case) does not influence the chose of OS. (Well, it might but not to you. If you were a huge company running huge workloads and really needed to research tiny performance differences... maybe.)
-
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
If I just wanted the array up and running, could I actually change the OS later on?
Sure, but that's like changing the OS anywhere... you start over.
-
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
If the controller is doing all the work, this shouldn't be impossible, no?
The controller does some work, but not all that much. It takes several disks and binds them together to present them as a single disk. That's all.
So changing OSes when you use hardware RAID makes it as "simple as" changing the OS on your desktop.
-
OK well, for now I'll give Scott that XS is a hypervisor not an OS.
And definitely agree that it's what goes directly on the hardware. After it's installed you are able to carve up the hardware resource to be shared by a large number of virtual servers/machines where you can install Windows or Linux or BSD, etc. To each of those VMs they aren't aware or barely aware that another VM is running beside them on the hardware.
