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:
It was an amazon glitch I think. It was only 250€ instead of the 700€ average price in other shops. Went up straight after I bought it. I could actually still return it and go all the other way to upgrade the rest of the hardware for software raid. But I kind of settled for this route already.
Not saying that you should return it, but why would hardware need to be upgraded for software RAID? Unless you are running an overburden Atom processor or are trying to run in only 1GB or less of RAM, I don't see software RAID being hardware hampered.
Not that bad excactly, but also not too far away. It's a mini-ITX AM1 with I think a total of 16GB RAM supported; I currently have 4 installed (so not really upgrade, as more replaceable).
(Just in case anyone would be interested/has the similiar requirement of running a server in a flat, rather than a basement; the case is a bitfenix phenom which almost excactly fills "one slot" of a standard ikea expedit bookshelf without really being noticeable. The second batch of hdd's would probably be housed in a second, "empty" phenom case)I was actually planning to upgrade to some form of mini-ITX xeon with ddr4 ecc ram so I could get to 32GB RAM and then using FreeNAS on it. Since Sata ports would have been limited, I would have opted for a cheap extender card (although I don't really know whether that would have been a good option).
But then this card came along and the advice wasn't really unilaterally against it, so I thought this was a quicker way, with the added benefit of getting 20 ports while still having the 4 onboard just in case.Now I feel a bit overwhelmed with oh so many options. I probably won't easily see career benefits in the humanities if my knowledge of operating systems is greater than 1 though
Given my few needs, in what ways would Win10 limit this or be in the way somehow? I'm not trying to be ignorant, just curious what are the advantages in my case (where there's no additional cost for windows). Which one would be the easiest to learn for a beginner from the many examples? Would FreeNas even make sense if I decided to keep the raid controller?Is my assertion correct that the real disadvantage of the raid controller is really the raid controller itself? Obviously if they fail, you need replacement. With a company like Adaptec, can one except that they keep older makes in stock even after they have gone off the market? Or would the best bet be to keep a second card ready at home (perhaps a used one)? And it needs to be excactly the same controller, not just the same series/chipset? Do these card fail often?
-
@Dashrender said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
How are you accessing these files? Just using Windows SMB file sharing? You specifically mention there is no other software installed in the OS, so I was assuming it must just be SMB file sharing.
With that in mind, Why pay the Windows tax? Why not install Linux? It's free, requires less system resources, etc.
- I'd personally go with XenServer and then a Linux distro in a VM assuming you can make partitions large enough to handle your file needs
2)The RAID controller is a typical server component, they are designed to run 24/7. Cooling will be your biggest issue here, noise being the second, and power draw the third. Other than saving money on power and your hearing, I see no reason to shut it down.
3)There is no reason to split the OS away from the array - you're wasting drive slots/storage/performance by doing so. As mentioned in #1, I'd install XS on a SD card or USB flash drive, then built a VM for the OS. The VM should have it's own partition for the OS, then a separate partition for the data drive.
4)I agree - you should have both. - because your files are larger, a larger stripe size is fine. 4K seems typical today.
- Quick Init is fine.
- yep, just use the default of the OS you're using - performance isn't critical it seems, so no point in trying to do anything fancy.
8)Well, by default Windows 10 goes into power save mode - though I don't know after what period. I also don't believe it will wake from normal traffic requests, so a WOL would be required or a manual wake up (press power button, etc) - Anything you missed? So you're starting with a 4 drive RAID 6 setup, but you plan to add 6-8 more disks down the road. hmmm.. .@scottalanmiller ?
- No I wouldn't try testing the rebuild, undue, worthless stress on the system.
- RTM (read the manual) - sorry I have no idea.
- I would only grow it once, but frankly, not a fan of growing it at all - and a question, can you add 6-8 disks to a pre existing RAID 6 array all at once? ages ago I could add disks to a RAID 5, but only one at a time. So if I was adding 6 disks, that was 6 different rebuild processes - that's a no go in my book. backup your data and rebuild the array and start over.
12a) what is Utilize the savings of RAID6 over a backup Please Please Please understand that RAID 6 is NOT a backup, not even close! If the RAID array had a URE (Unrecoverable Read Error), the whole array is toast and your data with it. RAID 6 does allow you to loose two drives and yet still have a viable system, but again this is not a backup. If you don't want to have to rerip all the movies, etc, you need to have an actual backup solution for this array. -
- is this still an issue? @scottalanmiller
Regarding cooling I was suprised the heatsink was so poor and no instructions provided. I have a 120mm fan at around 600rpm directed at the 2 heatsinks. Aside from watercoling I could only think of a more powerful fan like a noctua industrial or a more ventilated case.
I'm at least trying to be somewhat eco-sensitive, so if its not bad for the controller or the array, I wouldn't mind switching the server off. On the other hand, I have no idea how much such a thing actually consumes. Before installation power consumption was around 35w in idle.
Thanks for the many clarifications! - I'd personally go with XenServer and then a Linux distro in a VM assuming you can make partitions large enough to handle your file needs
-
FreeNAS makes no sense, IMHO, ever. It's nothing but a crippled version of FreeBSD. FreeBSD I would use rarely, but it has its place. But FreeNAS, never, because FreeBSD, at a minimum is always better. So if something that would only rarely be the best choice is always better than your choice, that choice should be eliminated completely.
FreeNAS isn't the worst thing in the world, it simply is never the best choice. So even considering it represents a bad decision making process. Keeping it in the decision pool just serves to trigger emotional mistakes in decision making (read: Predictably Irrational, they explain a lot of why this happens in there.)
For a hobby/home system, the importance of these decisions is obviously very low. You could even run the worst possible option, OpenFiler, and mostly be okay. But why not do the best for free, since the good options are all free? There isn't any upside to the bad options, so just avoid them.
The reason that people talk about FreeNAS and the like is because they are "easy to get up and running." But that's a tricky sales pitch. In fact, the last thing that you care about with storage is how easy it is to set up. What you care about is how easy it is to maintain. FreeNAS makes it easy to get up and running and then screws you if anything goes wrong and because it is unnecessarily complex, there is more to go wrong.
-
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
Do these card fail often?
Enterprise ones almost never fail.
-
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
Is my assertion correct that the real disadvantage of the raid controller is really the raid controller itself? Obviously if they fail, you need replacement.
That's a big factor. Hardware RAID costs money and expects you to be dedicated to maintaining support, just like any proprietary, black box solution.
-
Is that particular make considered an - obviously older - enterprise one?
I think one of the reasons people like me would jump to FreeNAS is that it's so easy and limited, has a nice graphical interface and doesn't require you to open a shell ever.
So other choices would be Solaris, XenServerVM and something? Except for Solaris, I haven't even heard of these before. I would need to learn a lot; I wouldn't know what a VM (Virtual Machine?) would be good for. Are all of these suggestions for both software raid and with the controller, or under the assumption of returning the controller?
-
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
I think one of the reasons people like me would jump to FreeNAS is that it's so easy and limited, has a nice graphical interface and doesn't require you to open a shell ever.
Ah but it does. The problem is is that the GUI is only useful when everything works. When things break, you are still stuck having to use the CLI, expect the CLI for FreeNAS is harder and more complex than without FreeNAS and you don't know what was done to set it up making it harder for you to know what's going on with your own system as well.
So the very reason you think that FreeNAS is potentially viable is the most important reason why I say that it is not. If you have ANY concern about the CLI, FreeNAS should be eliminated as it has the hardest CLI situation for when it matters.
-
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
Are all of these suggestions for both software raid and with the controller, or under the assumption of returning the controller?
Universal suggestions. XenServer or Solaris can both use hardware RAID and they both include enterprise software RAID. So they don't sway the decision beyond any other non-Windows offering.
-
I've actually just finished reading your article, so I will stay away from it too. But I was hypothesizing on why it could be popularized in general; because people are afraid of entirely new operating systems and FreeNas is falsly advertised as something less complex.
-
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
So other choices would be Solaris, XenServerVM and something? Except for Solaris, I haven't even heard of these before. I would need to learn a lot; I wouldn't know what a VM (Virtual Machine?) would be good for.
This really ups the ante, then. If you use Windows 10 and hardware RAID, is there really any learning for you in this? Anything significant at least? Not that you necessarily are looking at this as a learning opportunity, but that could be a huge factor.
Learning a hypervisor, how virtualization works, how enterprise servers are handled, a UNIX variant (Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc.), maybe software RAID.... could be very valuable.
-
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
I've actually just finished reading your article, so I will stay away from it too. But I was hypothesizing on why it could be popularized in general; because people are afraid of entirely new operating systems and FreeNas is falsly advertised as something less complex.
Oh I'm very aware of why people promote it.. because it's little pain up front and the danger is pushed off until later. It's a "stick your head in the sand" thing. Same as people who skip backups and just hope that they never have a failure. It's easy to sell people on the idea because emotionally it gets them through an initial barrier and lets them ignore the problems until they are forced to face them.
But when analysed logically, it really isn't a product category that makes sense unless you are getting a product that is treated like a proprietary NAS and paying for black box, inclusive support on it, like you might with Nexenta (which makes it a bit of a different product category.)
-
@scottalanmiller said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
@anthonyh said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
If I understand correctly, you're looking to set up a "NAS" basically, right? If that's the case, I would recommend looking into something like FreeNAS/NAS4Free/OpenFiler. These are *NIX distributions geared towards the system being a file server. There are other features built in that you may or may not benefit from, but it may be worth it over running Win10 on the box.
FreeNAS and NAS4Free I would generally avoid (re: Jurassic Park Effect) as was mentioned. OpenFiler you need to run far, far away from. It's been out of development for many years, it's based on a system that vanished even longer ago, it's unpatched and was unstable and totally useless even when it was "current." They actually designed in data loss to coerce their users into paying for support or "upgrades" to fix the bugs that they included.
https://community.spiceworks.com/topic/373443-why-we-recommend-against-openfiler
I had no idea about OpenFiler. That's terrible. Glad I never used it!!
FWIW I always configure NFS and or SMB on a minimal Linux install if I need a file server. I think platforms like FreeNAS have their place (when used and understood appropriately). I do agree that it's very beneficial to understand what's going on under the hood.
-
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
I would need to learn a lot; I wouldn't know what a VM (Virtual Machine?) would be good for.
general rule is, if it is worth running, it should be virtualized (desktops don't count because they are the virtual to physical translation device.) So getting your hypervisor in place is the first step before even talking about an operating system, for example.
http://www.smbitjournal.com/2015/04/virtualizing-even-a-single-server/
http://www.smbitjournal.com/2012/11/virtualization-as-a-standard-pattern/
-
@anthonyh said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
I had no idea about OpenFiler. That's terrible. Glad I never used it!!
Sadly, I did. Back in the 2.3 days. Thank goodness I never used it for iSCSI and never ran into some of the issues that people have with total data loss and no errors. I used to do a bit of support for it, building HA clusters and such. But the product was terrible even when it was at its peak. They made some crazy design choices and really were not competent at all.
Thankfully, they gave up and the product died years ago. We made some serious complaints and they responded to the thread with some half assed attempt at making the system look current, but it never went anywhere and last I had seen the system was dormant for many years.
-
@anthonyh said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
FWIW I always configure NFS and or SMB on a minimal Linux install if I need a file server. I think platforms like FreeNAS have their place (when used and understood appropriately). I do agree that it's very beneficial to understand what's going on under the hood.
Where would that place be, though? If you know enough to be able to use it safely, then what's the benefit to it? And if you don't know enough that the GUI is useless, you don't really know enough to use it safely.
It's a Catch-22, those for whom it is safe to use would find the GUI to be in the way. Those that do not would find it dangerous.
If it wasn't storage, it would make more sense. But storage is always critical. You can't realistically have storage that isn't important if it fails.
-
That's why the appliance with a GUI approach still makes sense for other kids of things like firewall devices. They are stateless, if it fails, just replace it. The device itself does not contain mission critical data.
-
Unless I have completely misunderstood the information presented on the Adaptec website, it seems as most controllers would be compatible between each other. Hence I could also get a newer one, should the 51645 become unavailable.
Although I am slightly confused by what a HostRAID should be (is that software raid on a pci-raid controller?), it probably doesn't affect the 51645.
To be prepared for a controller failure, would it still make no sense to install the OS outside the array? The likelihood of the OS drive failing is probably a lot larger than that of the controller. But would that damage the array or have any impact on it, or could you just swap the OS drive without the array recognizing any difference?
Actually, coming back to this, @Dashrender suggested not installing the OS away from the array; by that you meant install it directly on the RAID6, right? As opposed to just having a single OS disk plugged into the raid controller rather than the mainboard sata port.Bootable arrays: before replacing the controller with a different model it is necessary to first install the operating system drivers for the new controller otherwise the operating system installed on the bootable array cannot start. In order to load the operating system drivers for the replacement controller just add the "new" controller to the system without arrays attached to it and install the driver before you remove the "old" controller.
That's from Adaptec. With only a single PCI slot, that seems like an impossible task.
-
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
Unless I have completely misunderstood the information presented on the Adaptec website, it seems as most controllers would be compatible between each other. Hence I could also get a newer one, should the 51645 become unavailable.
That is generally true.
-
@geertcourmacher said in Raid 6 Amateur File Server Setup Questions:
Unless I have completely misunderstood the information presented on the Adaptec website, it seems as most controllers would be compatible between each other. Hence I could also get a newer one, should the 51645 become unavailable.
Although I am slightly confused by what a HostRAID should be (is that software raid on a pci-raid controller?), it probably doesn't affect the 51645.
To be prepared for a controller failure, would it still make no sense to install the OS outside the array? The likelihood of the OS drive failing is probably a lot larger than that of the controller. But would that damage the array or have any impact on it, or could you just swap the OS drive without the array recognizing any difference?
Actually, coming back to this, @Dashrender suggested not installing the OS away from the array; by that you meant install it directly on the RAID6, right? As opposed to just having a single OS disk plugged into the raid controller rather than the mainboard sata port.Correct, the main OS you'll interact with should be on the array. That said, the hypervisor, XS, should be installed on a USB stick or a SD card. These are easy to replace in case of a failure, and are suppose to be easy to clone prefailure to have a backup. So the system will boot from USB or SD card.. then access the RAID controller. in the case of the a failed RAID controller, boot into the RAID card software, import the array from the drives into the card, then reboot, booting to XS this time, now install drivers for the new RAID controller if needed, now XS should see the array and you can start your VMs.
-
So it seems I should really get to know another OS. In that case I'll probably have to put the entire thing off for a while as I won't be finding the time in the months to come.
Which would be the easiest to learn from the good ones suggested here?And just to understand the decision-making a bit more, why is it so terribly stupid to run a client OS on a server if I have zero need for server OS capabilities? I'd assume there is a risk of it messing with the controller or anything of the sort, but if you care to elaborate, all the better.
