|
japtor posted:I think the 409slim originally came out supporting up to 500GB drives (or whatever the largest was back then), but it works with 1TB ones fine.
|
![]() |
|
Yeah the 1TB one listed (WD) is advanced format afaik, to be safe you could ask them to test it out at product@synology.com. I asked about some other 1TB drives a few days ago, no clue how long they take to go through testing though. They have a 750GB WD drive on their compatibility list but it's a different model number, looks like it was a 5400RPM one.
|
![]() |
|
I posted in the HTPC thread and was directed here. Right now my media storage consists of two 1.5TB Western Digital MyBook drives hooked up to my Mac Mini via USB. The Mac Mini is running XBMC and is connected to my Living room TV. 90% of my viewing is done in here. I also have an Apple TV 2 and iMac that I watch videos on in other rooms. My main issue is that occasionally the video playback will stop (XBMC says buffering) and not return for 20-30 seconds. Sometimes XBMC will pick it back up, other times I get kicked back to the XBMC browser. At any rate, somewhere along the line the data isn't being served like it should. 3TB of unprotected data also makes it a little harder to sleep at night. I think it's time to move into a NAS. I read that OP but I'm thinking it's a little dated at this point. It looks like the Synology and QNAP brands are popular? Can someone recommend a model for what I'm doing? I think all I really care about is : - 4TB minimum of usable storage. - Ability to run SickBeard and SABnzbd+ - Possibility of sharing data directly to my iPad/iPhone? Currently I have and AirVideo server running on my iMac that is pulling data from a shared folder on my Mac Mini. There has got to be a better way! (Besides just running AirVideo on the Mac Mini) And while I'm at it, a couple of questions : - Disks included or diskless? Which one make more sense financially? - If I do buy diskless, is it possible to rip apart the MyBooks and utilize those drives or is that a really bad idea? - I do have a limited knowledge of building and configuring PCs. Would I be better off trying to put my own NAS system together to save some money or is it more cost effective to go with the pre-built units?
|
![]() |
|
I've been pretty unhappy with my WD green performance (yep, I didnt read before I bought them) in my mdadm Raid 5 array at home. I'm taking a bit of a leap of faith and got 3 of these. Did a little reasearch on Google and the [H] forums. They're pretty new so not very well tested for "long term use" but I'm going to give it a shot. Did I make the right choice? They seem to be 512k sectors which is good.
|
![]() |
|
With Newegg doing discounts on NAS hardware and my tax return coming in simultaneously, I'm thinking about jumping on board with grabbing one. Kinda torn between the Synology DS411j and the Thecus N4100PRO. I'm really digging the Synology management interface, but the Thecus has one extra USB port for me to use if I end up hooking up externals too. Also really like that the Synology software supports EXT4. I'm not going to be running RAID initially, as I'm going to end up buying a single drive at a time. Does anybody have experience with either of these devices and how they handle having additional capacity added by slapping in an extra drive? Is it as simple a process on them as it would be putting them into a normal computer? I figure if it's not set for RAID, it should be more or less popping in the drive, formatting and it's done. If I do eventually switch over to one RAID level or another, is it a complicated process with either of these to add storage? Finally, which is the preferred one within the thread? I seem to recall reading more about the Synology in here than the Thecus, but I just want to get all my ducks in a row.
|
![]() |
|
I finally got everything up and running last night, after struggling through all the compatibility issues with Solaris 11. Once I got it installed, the actual zpool setup was a breeze! pool: storagepool state: ONLINE scan: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM storagepool ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1-0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c9t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c9t4d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c9t5d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 cache c9t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT storagepool 216K 1.78T 37.3K /storagepool storagepool/data 34.6K 1.78T 34.6K /storagepool/data storagepool/media 34.6K 1.78T 34.6K /storagepool/media The only problem is I couldn't get my NTFS drives mounted on the Solaris box. I tried a few things but no luck, so right now I'm transferring everything from my Windows box over the LAN to the shared pool storage on the Solaris box. It's probably going to take another two days, but at least it's working. So, right now I have about 2TB usable on the Solaris box, but I have two more 2TB drives that are in the Windows box. Once I transfer all the data off of those drives, I was hoping to add them to the tank, so let me know if this makes sense: Right now, the pool I have consists of two 1TB drives, and one 2TB drive. When the data transfer is finished, I will detach a 1TB drive from the pool, replace it with a 2TB drive, and rebuild the tank. Then, do the same thing with the other 1TB drive. At that point, my tank will be three 2TB drives, and I'll have two 1TB drives left over. What's the best way to add those 1TB drives to the pool? As another RAIDZ1 in the same tank? Another question I had is once all this is finished, I'm still going to need a couple of VMs somewhere for handling all of the media streaming and automation stuff that I want to use with my library. Would Virtualbox on the Solaris host be alright? Is that a terrible idea? Or am I still better off having a completely separate ESX box for that? I've got 8GB of RAM in the Solaris box, and I know ZFS is supposed to be pretty RAM-hungry so I'm concerned that adding a VM to the mix might be pushing it.
|
![]() |
|
G-Prime posted:With Newegg doing discounts on NAS hardware and my tax return coming in simultaneously, I'm thinking about jumping on board with grabbing one. Kinda torn between the Synology DS411j and the Thecus N4100PRO. I'm really digging the Synology management interface, but the Thecus has one extra USB port for me to use if I end up hooking up externals too. Also really like that the Synology software supports EXT4. I'm not going to be running RAID initially, as I'm going to end up buying a single drive at a time. Does anybody have experience with either of these devices and how they handle having additional capacity added by slapping in an extra drive? Is it as simple a process on them as it would be putting them into a normal computer? I figure if it's not set for RAID, it should be more or less popping in the drive, formatting and it's done. If I do eventually switch over to one RAID level or another, is it a complicated process with either of these to add storage? Finally, which is the preferred one within the thread? I seem to recall reading more about the Synology in here than the Thecus, but I just want to get all my ducks in a row.
|
![]() |
|
what is this posted:You don't want to ever hookup externals via USB except in the case of backing up or rsync or something. Speed will be glacial. Can you go into more detail on this? Read or write or both? If it's just slow writes, that's no big deal in my book. As long as I can get ~10mbit or more reads via USB, I'll be happy.
|
![]() |
|
ephori posted:The only problem is I couldn't get my NTFS drives mounted on the Solaris box. I tried a few things but no luck, so right now I'm transferring everything from my Windows box over the LAN to the shared pool storage on the Solaris box. It's probably going to take another two days, but at least it's working. With the drive replacement strategy you're doing, you'll want to replace the individual vdevs (zpool replace) and resilver for each disk replacement, then the full 2TB of space per vdev should be present with the last resilver seeing that the raid stripe size would be calculated with the minimum vdev size as 2TB. Just a note that this can be risky given you're resilvering constantly and if one went out you'd be screwed on a RAIDZ1. This is part of why a lot of people recommend just buying a new set of disks and copying to a new zpool for an "expansion" strategy. My plan is to do it the way it was intended - buy a brand new set of disks and copy over (perhaps as a mirror for a while), once it's stable, decommission the old pool, sell off the old disks or use them as scratch in a high-risk raid-0 or something. My OpenSolaris box has 2GB of RAM. It works fine for me. People mention ZFS being a bit of a memory hog because they're running rather large-scale setups typically with a fair amount of load and could use more cache to improve performance.
|
![]() |
|
G-Prime posted:Can you go into more detail on this? Read or write or both? If it's just slow writes, that's no big deal in my book. As long as I can get ~10mbit or more reads via USB, I'll be happy. Off the top of my head USB1 max theoretical transfer speed is 12mbit and USB2 is 400mbit.
|
![]() |
|
There's also CPU usage associated with USB reads/writes. These devices use one or sometimes two cores for everything. CIFS, RAID parity calcs, it's all on the same CPU. Something like USB will eat up a non-negligible amount of CPU, particularly if the filesystem is something like NTFS, that the linux these boxes use does not handle particularly efficiently. If you want to hang USB drives off something slow, buy a router that lets you plug in USB drives. Buy a nice soho NAS if you want quality file serving and fast transfers. You want extra drives, hook them up by eSATA.
|
![]() |
|
Thermopyle posted:Off the top of my head USB1 max theoretical transfer speed is 12mbit and USB2 is 400mbit. Exactly. And the DS411j has USB2 ports. That's why I'm not understanding why there'd be an issue. Even half of USB2 wouldn't be terribly slow. Faster than the router could handle, for sure. ^^^^^ Edit: Fair enough. That makes more sense.
|
![]() |
|
what is this posted:There's also CPU usage associated with USB reads/writes. That's what I get for not following the thread. I just assume everyone has an awesome quad core server like me! ![]()
|
![]() |
|
Legdiian posted:I think it's time to move into a NAS. I read that OP but I'm thinking it's a little dated at this point. It looks like the Synology and QNAP brands are popular? Can someone recommend a model for what I'm doing? I think all I really care about is : I know Synology has iPhone apps and possibly QNAP and ReadyNAS...but AirVideo is probably the best since I'm guessing their apps can only steam MP4s (the CPUs in them probably can't transcode fast enough to work like AirVideo). Diskless makes more sense, although it may vary if you can find a deal I guess, but generally the disk included ones have a pretty large premium. I wouldn't mess with the MyBooks in case they have something funky inside, or just suck for RAID use. As for building one...how limited is your knowledge? I've looked into it in the past myself but ultimately decided I'd rather just buy a box than mess with building my own. The issue for me isn't so much the cost or building (I don't have any PCs laying around to help there), it's just the software setup vs ease of use for me.
|
![]() |
|
necrobobsledder posted:ntfs-3g worked for me on my OpenSolaris machine, what'd you try?
|
![]() |
|
![]() Ordered a DS211+ from JR.com, they shipped me a DS211. What I thought was a good deal that was up for a few weeks was actually a big fuckup on either JRs or Synology's side since they claim it was labeled wrong. Labeled in error as in the entire product page described the DS211+ down to the T. ![]()
|
![]() |
|
dietcokefiend posted:
At worst you'll get all your money back, best case they cross ship you a 211+ or refund you some price difference. They can't charge you a restocking fee if they sold you the wrong thing.
|
![]() |
|
japtor posted:You'll need a four drive box (probably around $400?), so the Synology DS411j (or whatever other 410/411) might work, no clue about SickBeard and SABnzbd though. ReadyNAS is probably another brand you could look into. sabnzbd works fine on my 411j, I just googled for it & synology, found a packaged version and its a one click install from there. The default downloader won't use parity files so highly recommended to upgrade to sabnzbd.
|
![]() |
|
I originally posted this in the Networking thread, because I'm an idiot and somehow missed this one. Hope nobody minds the crosspostin' ----- My house has seven desktop computers and laptops, and about twice that many 1TB+ external hard drives, all full to the brim with crap. Naturally, we're looking at a NAS box of some kind. It's basically been put in my hands, so my plan was to throw together a cheap-as-shit Athlon X2 build or something, load that bitch up with two 2TB Caviar Blacks and another two cheaper 2TB drives for backups [or, as has occurred to me after reading the OP, four 2TB drives in RAID 5 with backups of absolute essentials, like photographs, to the cloud], and slap Ubuntu on there, which I've been fooling around with lately as an adventure into the Land of Linux and am starting to get the hang of. We'd all connect to it essentially through the same wireless modem/router, but our network is kinda complicated for a single household. There's a telephone cable running from the phone socket to the modem/router. Two lengths of cat5e run through the walls to downstairs, one connecting to a wireless repeater, the other connected to my iMac from under my desk. The idea is to put the NAS box under my desk, and then hook up a switch to share the connection between my Mac and the NAS box. Lastly, my plan to share the storage in the new box simply by giving any computer connected to the network read/write permissions for each hard drive and set up screen sharing so I can deal with it from any computer without having to have a separate monitor. Are there any glaring faults in this plan? Is there a much simpler way to do this that I don't know about? Any help/advice appreciated.
|
![]() |
|
Yes, instead of building a computer buy a Synology DS1511+, upgrade the RAM to 3GB, and fill it with 3TB hard drives. Dual Core 1.8Ghz CPUs, 1GB of RAM standard, easy upgrade to 3GB. Expand to 15 drives with eSATA expansion modules. Dual NICS supporting failover and 802.11AD link aggregation for 2Gbit throughput. Windows ActiveDirectory and ACL support. FTP Server Web Server PHP+MySQL IP Camera server Photo/Video Server BitTorrent Client Usenet Client SAZNBD support Streaming Music Server DLNA/uPNP Server + PS3/Xbox360 support iTunes Server Printer Server Apple Time Machine Server Windows Backup clients iSCSI iPhone and Android applications Upwards of 100MB/s (megabytes, not bits) read and write over the network. Small, compact, energy efficient, quiet, and looks a bunch better than a hacked together whitebox server will. (Buy a 411+ if you're too cheap, but the 1511+ will still likely beat out the pricing on a whitebox server with an enclosure that size which does hot swappable drives/etc) what is this fucked around with this message at 19:54 on Feb 6, 2011 |
![]() |
|
what is this posted:At worst you'll get all your money back, best case they cross ship you a 211+ or refund you some price difference. Well I was given two options, return for a full refund or take a 40 dollar credit. I think I am going with the credit since that will mean a 299 DS211 for 259.
|
![]() |
|
what is this posted:Synology DS1511+ ![]() Smudgie Buggler fucked around with this message at 03:30 on Feb 7, 2011 |
![]() |
|
ZFS guys: I'm getting suspiciously high CPU usage during file transfers (network write to server) that I think might be bottlenecking my write speeds. 2TB 5900rpm drive on my desktop, copying to my shiny new zpool (2x 6-drive RAID-Z2s, Seagate 5900), speeds are average ~65MB/s, but the load average reported on CPU (E6600) is nuts, 2.8. No dedup, no compression (at least I assume compressratio = 1.00x means compression is off). Any ideas what is owning CPU?
|
![]() |
|
movax posted:ZFS guys: I'm getting suspiciously high CPU usage during file transfers (network write to server) that I think might be bottlenecking my write speeds. Can you post a "top"? On my FreeNAS virtualbox (I'm evaluating NASes right now) the damn em0 interface (emulated intel server MT) kernel thread would go to 50% cpu. ![]()
|
![]() |
|
movax posted:ZFS guys: I'm getting suspiciously high CPU usage during file transfers (network write to server) that I think might be bottlenecking my write speeds. ZFS seems to like using the cpu. I get high cpu when i write too. My cpu is abit slower though. Dualcore celeron 1.6ghz. I get full gigabit write speeds so i don't worry much about the cpu.
|
![]() |
|
Any recommendations on RAID cards with 6 SATA ports for an out of warranty Dell Poweredge 1800 server running Win2k3? Boss is too cheap to replace the machine so this looks like my only option. We had 2 drives die in an array last night and Dells website is total shit. It's out of warranty so I don't feel too badly putting in a non dell part if that's my best option. Only requirement is the card supports 2TB drives, the current card maxes out at 500GB and we've outgrown the storage this server provides. I'd rather just replace the damn thing but good lord Dell charges a lot for what I'm looking for. Has to run windows as my boss is only comfortable with Backup Exec (and I fucking hate it). EDIT: Am I asking in the wrong place here? If so I completely apologize. Matt Zerella fucked around with this message at 17:39 on Feb 8, 2011 |
![]() |
|
karoshi posted:Can you post a "top"? On my FreeNAS virtualbox (I'm evaluating NASes right now) the damn em0 interface (emulated intel server MT) kernel thread would go to 50% cpu. It's actually all in kernel on Solaris 11, so I think I used lockstat properly and did some digging. I e-mailed zfs-discuss, I'll just paste what I sent here (actually, edit, huge wall of text, I will just post kernel output) movax emailed zfs-discuss posted:Hi all, code:
quote:Second, a copy from my desktop PC to my new zpool. (5900rpm drive over code:
quote:Here it seems as if 'i86_mwait' is occupying the top spot (is this Figured an E6600 would be more than enough. @LamoTheKid: HW RAID? Could always just get a PERC5/i, really cheap on eBay complete with battery-backup.
|
![]() |
|
I'll check that out. So I can just use SAS to SATA adapters and I'm good to go? Any speed degradation by using the adapters? Sorry, I'm a little bit clueless here. I'd do software RAID but the server doesn't have a ton of RAM, and is under a decent constant load.
|
![]() |
|
LamoTheKid posted:I'll check that out. So I can just use SAS to SATA adapters and I'm good to go? Any speed degradation by using the adapters? Sorry, I'm a little bit clueless here. Yeah, IIRC, I once bought a PERC5/i to see if I could use it as a dumb HBA for my Solaris box (I could if I made the controller setup 8 single-drive RAID 0s, which didn't sit well with me, so I got rid of it.). Just buy the appropriate breakout cables for the PERC, no active adapter needed.
|
![]() |
|
Done and done, thanks guys. I told my boss next year this box gets replaced.
|
![]() |
|
conntrack posted:ZFS seems to like using the cpu. I get high cpu when i write too. My cpu is Not sure if the CPU should be bottlenecking, but yeah, ZFS does use a lot of CPU. It's checksumming everything as it writes no matter what, and then doing a lot of parity calculation for RAIDZ2. If you were bored and had time on your hands I would try your test with those same disks in RAIDZ, and maybe even some mirrored pairs or other combos you can think of.
|
![]() |
|
FISHMANPET posted:Not sure if the CPU should be bottlenecking, but yeah, ZFS does use a lot of CPU. It's checksumming everything as it writes no matter what, and then doing a lot of parity calculation for RAIDZ2. If you were bored and had time on your hands I would try your test with those same disks in RAIDZ, and maybe even some mirrored pairs or other combos you can think of. If i am indeed bored i will install dtrace this weekend and profile this. Altough you would think movax spindle qount should be enough for good performance. I have three raidz1 raidsets in my pool. The number of raidsets will affect the number of parallel transfeers you can make and thus performance.
|
![]() |
|
conntrack posted:If i am indeed bored i will install dtrace this weekend and profile this. The max disk performance of a pool is (speed of vdev) * (number of vdevs). The max speed of a vdev is the slowest individual disk in the pool. I know this because I had to find a reason to not setup our X4500 as a 44 disk RAIDZ2 with 2 hotspares.
|
![]() |
|
FISHMANPET posted:The max disk performance of a pool is (speed of vdev) * (number of vdevs). The max speed of a vdev is the slowest individual disk in the pool. I know this because I had to find a reason to not setup our X4500 as a 44 disk RAIDZ2 with 2 hotspares. Good man. to large raidsets are the dreams of pedophiles and HP sells people.
|
![]() |
|
conntrack posted:Good man. to large raidsets are the dreams of pedophiles and HP sells people. English is the dream of online forums.
|
![]() |
|
conntrack posted:Good man. to large raidsets are the dreams of pedophiles and HP sells people. Not to mention your rebuild time is forever with a setup like that, because it's basically (time to read entire disk) * (number of disks in vdev). Man fuck that shit, I came out swinging when our "storage" guy asked why we shouldn't do that and our "boss" said we should do it.
|
![]() |
|
Hum. I've never had a NAS to play with so I bought a cheap 1TB WD drive to play with seeing as my external hard disk died (read: got dropped oops) I saw the 'backup' option on the config page of the NAS and it was just some instructions saying use Windows 7's backup utility to send your files to a network location (I'm sure you all know what happened next) I discover that W7 Home Premium won't let you back up to a network location despite: A- Vista could B- The NAS' own instructions tell you to use window's backup utility even though your main demographic wont be able to. What I seem to misunderstand and perhaps someone could enlighten me is this: If you have a pro copy of windows you are probably on a corporate network which has some kind of server based back up solution - so surely it is more imperative for the home users to be able to back up to a network device using a client OS? Or is it that because I'm used to being stuck on server 03/winXP that when you get to server08/w7 you start backing up peoples shit from each machine?
|
![]() |
|
conntrack posted:If i am indeed bored i will install dtrace this weekend and profile this. I certainly can't test anymore, one of my 1068Es burned up on reboot (sparked, flicker, crackled and now just powers up with all LEDs frozen on). RMAing it, and buying the Intel SASU8CI to replace it. Fuck, I just want my server back up ![]()
|
![]() |
|
angry armadillo posted:Hum. Short version: Microsoft did it for SKU differentiation. Either do an Anytime Upgrade to Pro if you need it, find another backup solution, or use a Windows Home Server box, which organizes backups via network even for Home versions. And not all W7 Pro boxes are in corporate settings. Heck, corporate boxes use Enterprise more often, but that's besides the point. How many small businesses have a full Domain with roaming profiles? That's fairly complex to administer. Alternative: Just use Pro and a NAS appliance and back up. Or be the type of nerd with a NAS in your house instead of an external drive. There's your market for Pro.
|
![]() |
|
What are my options for keeping two zfs file servers in sync, other than rsync over the network? Ideally I'm looking for something like rsync that would let me push changesets onto an external hard drive which I would carry to the other file server and get it to sync. I know zfs has zfs send which does something, I'm just not sure if I can use it for my purpose. I guess using the zfs tools would be for block level sync which wouldn't work for two-way. Maybe some sort of script which copies recently modified files to the external drive would work. Has anyone tried something like this before? vanjalolz fucked around with this message at 02:58 on Feb 10, 2011 |
![]() |