«608 »
  • Post
  • Reply
Devian666
Aug 20, 2008

Take some advice Chris.



Fun Shoe

LmaoTheKid posted:

The N600 looks nice (dual band, gigabit switch)...but no Tomato support.

I like the N600/3700 for home use. It copes with my many wireless devices, streaming on both 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz at the same time, and all my servers and VMs.

The stock firmware works well (in my opinion netgear are the only routers that don't need to be flashed with a third party firmware to work reliably) but no tomato.

If you want to look at other routers pick through the offerings in the home networking thread.

One other thing to consider if you want to use a lot of wireless bandwidth is the benchmarked throughput.
Not all routers are the same.

wanderlost
Dec 3, 2010


Dream Product: 2x 2.5" hard drive enclosure, RAID 0/1/JBOD, USB 2/3 connection, wifi modem, internal battery (4-5hrs w/ wifi).

I travel a lot, and generate a fair amount of content. Enough that it can easily sync over wifi, but too much to sync over a cellular network. My data is important to me, critical even, I want it mirrored on two drives (ssd's ideally but that's for another thread) while I'm traveling, and then when I do get fast internet, I want to sync the external with the cloud. Why can't someone intelligent make this? I'd settle for 40% of apple caliber. - Right now, everything I see is crap.

Star War Sex Parrot
Oct 2, 2003



Muldoon

wanderlost posted:

Dream Product: 2x 2.5" hard drive enclosure, RAID 0/1/JBOD, USB 2/3 connection, wifi modem, internal battery (4-5hrs w/ wifi).

I travel a lot, and generate a fair amount of content. Enough that it can easily sync over wifi, but too much to sync over a cellular network. My data is important to me, critical even, I want it mirrored on two drives (ssd's ideally but that's for another thread) while I'm traveling, and then when I do get fast internet, I want to sync the external with the cloud. Why can't someone intelligent make this? I'd settle for 40% of apple caliber. - Right now, everything I see is crap.
Comedy option: people are constantly unloading their shitty gaming laptops in SA-Mart. They're typically dual-drive RAID monstrosities, and they hit your battery, USB 3, and Wi-Fi requirements.

Longinus00
Dec 29, 2005
Ur-Quan

wanderlost posted:

Dream Product: 2x 2.5" hard drive enclosure, RAID 0/1/JBOD, USB 2/3 connection, wifi modem, internal battery (4-5hrs w/ wifi).

I travel a lot, and generate a fair amount of content. Enough that it can easily sync over wifi, but too much to sync over a cellular network. My data is important to me, critical even, I want it mirrored on two drives (ssd's ideally but that's for another thread) while I'm traveling, and then when I do get fast internet, I want to sync the external with the cloud. Why can't someone intelligent make this? I'd settle for 40% of apple caliber. - Right now, everything I see is crap.

The internal battery would probably double the cost of the unit. That's why.

Devian666
Aug 20, 2008

Take some advice Chris.



Fun Shoe

Star War Sex Parrot posted:

Comedy option: people are constantly unloading their shitty gaming laptops in SA-Mart. They're typically dual-drive RAID monstrosities, and they hit your battery, USB 3, and Wi-Fi requirements.

Usually the main negative on those laptops (besides the obvious) is that they tend to be heavy, which is an issue if you are taking it everywhere. Other than that the comedy option may be possible.

wanderlost
Dec 3, 2010


Longinus00 posted:

The internal battery would probably double the cost of the unit. That's why.

Segate makes a single drive with a wifi chip that's designed for streaming content to iOS devices, doesn't look like the battery makes it prohibitively expensive. If Apple made this product, I'd gladly pay 400 for it, before the price of drives. I know this is expensive, but this isn't a hobby, I'm a professional and I have a budget.

Devian666 posted:

Usually the main negative on those laptops (besides the obvious) is that they tend to be heavy, which is an issue if you are taking it everywhere. Other than that the comedy option may be possible.

Right, this gets me nothing over what I'm already using. (2x 1TB western digital passport drives). I want something that's going to make it easier for me than my current situation, and isn't going to take up a tone of room. Space is at a premium on the bus.

japtor
Oct 28, 2005
WELL ARNT I JUST MR. LA DE FUCKEN DA. oh yea and i suck cocks too


Do you have a laptop? Just curious why you can't just sync it through the laptop itself, unless this is just a extreme convenience factor thing. Take out the wifi and I guess there's a bunch of bus powered dual drive options out there at least.

...I know there's some mobile NAS thing(s) but then I think you'd be boned on direct attachment and filesystem options, and I don't know if they're actually "mobile" beyond just being small.

movax
Aug 30, 2008



Comedy Option #2: Buy a box, cobble together everything inside of it, carry around with you (i.e. portable 2.5" RAID dock + a home-built DC UPS).

In other news, looks like Solaris 11 just launched. Might make a holiday project out of it and upgrade to it whilst also going to ESXi on my server.

Wompa164
Jul 19, 2001

Don't write ghouls.


Posted this in the enterprise storage thread:

I'm not sure if this is the appropriate place to post this, but heregoes.

I've got about 6TB of personal data that I would like to back up to tape, on either LTO4 or LTO5. I don't own a capable tape drive but through my office I have access to a capable controller card and a copy of Kroll OnTrack.

Does anyone have suggestions for possibly renting an LTO4 or 5 drive? I'd only need it to create a backup set of my data so purchasing it doesn't make much sense to me.

0x17h
Feb 24, 2011


I'm strongly considering setting up some kind of virtualization solution on my MicroServer (this thing is awesome, by the way). My requirements are: ZFS, sickbeard/usenet/torrents/etc, and maybe another VM for messing around.
Right now I have 4x1TB drives in the swappable bays for raw storage, and the stock 250GB drive in the 5.25 bay for storing VMs, configuration files, etc.


Option A:
-Run ZFS-capable OS directly on hardware
-Virtualize everything else in VirtualBox


Option B:
-Run ESXi directly on hardware
-Virtualize ZFS-capable OS
-Virtualize everything else, too

Option C:
???

Which one of these is better? Are there any other ways of sharing the disk array amongst all the VMs, besides via standard network file sharing protocols?

Matt Zerella
Oct 7, 2002


0x17h posted:

I'm strongly considering setting up some kind of virtualization solution on my MicroServer (this thing is awesome, by the way). My requirements are: ZFS, sickbeard/usenet/torrents/etc, and maybe another VM for messing around.
Right now I have 4x1TB drives in the swappable bays for raw storage, and the stock 250GB drive in the 5.25 bay for storing VMs, configuration files, etc.


Option A:
-Run ZFS-capable OS directly on hardware
-Virtualize everything else in VirtualBox


Option B:
-Run ESXi directly on hardware
-Virtualize ZFS-capable OS
-Virtualize everything else, too

Option C:
???

Which one of these is better? Are there any other ways of sharing the disk array amongst all the VMs, besides via standard network file sharing protocols?

FreeBSD has a built in port of SABNZBD and I'm pretty sure sick beard and all those programs just need Python right? 9.0RC1 has ZFS v28. I'm running Tmux with rtorrent, zero problems and stable as all hell.

You can always run VirtualBox if you want to mess with anything, but I find it a lot easier to not fuck around with NFS between the two VMs.

kill your idols
Sep 11, 2003

by T. Finninho


0x17h posted:

I'm strongly considering setting up some kind of virtualization solution on my MicroServer (this thing is awesome, by the way). My requirements are: ZFS, sickbeard/usenet/torrents/etc, and maybe another VM for messing around.
Right now I have 4x1TB drives in the swappable bays for raw storage, and the stock 250GB drive in the 5.25 bay for storing VMs, configuration files, etc.


Option A:
-Run ZFS-capable OS directly on hardware
-Virtualize everything else in VirtualBox


Option B:
-Run ESXi directly on hardware
-Virtualize ZFS-capable OS
-Virtualize everything else, too

Option C:
???

Which one of these is better? Are there any other ways of sharing the disk array amongst all the VMs, besides via standard network file sharing protocols?

Option A might be the better of options, since you'd need to RDM the drives to ESXi with no DirectPath I/O support on the N40L? ProLiant.

necrobobsledder
Mar 21, 2005
Lay down your soul to the gods rock 'n roll

Nap Ghost

I'd recommend going with ESXi normally and running a Solaris OS for your ZFS partly because VirtualBox being a primarily hosted hypervisor model and not by default going to restart your VMs after a failure. Also, if you have a high load situation, ESXi would probably handle it better than VirtualBox or xVM. One downside of ESXi is certainly cost if using the essentials license or the RAM limits if using free. The lack of DirectPath VT-d hardly matters to me in a home NAS off a $300 Microserver. Unless you're trying to use a lot of servers with high speed interconnects for your own SAN, it's mostly an enterprise-class need for virtualized storage.

Sharing disks across all VMs is by best practice network-based. CIFS/SMB will be the best option overall, but I'd consider clustering file systems like Gluster or GFS if you're willing to put some time in, but clustered filesystems are a bit of a proprietary thing and usually mean OS standardization.

an actual cat irl
Aug 29, 2004



To anyone using FreeNAS 8: have you had any joy getting email reporting working?

I have FreeNAS set to run daily short SMART tests on all my drives, and would like a daily report emailed to me. I've configured my email server settings, set the correct address as the root user, and the test email works fine. I've also enabled the relevant settings in the SMART service panel. However, I don't receive any emails.

I heard about some issues sending emails using SSL from v8.1, but even the supposed fix (switching email to send via plain text) didn't make any difference.

Residency Evil
Jul 28, 2003

4/5 godo BRAINS


Anyone have any thoughts on this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...N82E16859321014 ?

I have the feeling that my old P3 1Ghz box is killing me as far as power goes. All I really want is something that I can leave in the corner and run a torrent client on that I manage via the web from my MBA and stream to boxee.

Goon Matchmaker
Oct 23, 2003

I play too much EVE-Online

Residency Evil posted:

Anyone have any thoughts on this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...N82E16859321014 ?

I have one. It has since been decommissioned since the CPU is rather anemic. However it will work well streaming stuff to XBMC. Don't expect stellar transfer rates. I was getting 60-70 MB/s writing to a software RAID5 volume using SAMBA on Linux. Reads could come close to maxing out a gigabit link. More than enough to stream but it was almost pegging the CPU so doing trans-coding on the fly for something like PS3 Media Server would have resulted in a bad experience.

Residency Evil
Jul 28, 2003

4/5 godo BRAINS


Goon Matchmaker posted:

I have one. It has since been decommissioned since the CPU is rather anemic. However it will work well streaming stuff to XBMC. Don't expect stellar transfer rates. I was getting 60-70 MB/s writing to a software RAID5 volume using SAMBA on Linux. Reads could come close to maxing out a gigabit link. More than enough to stream but it was almost pegging the CPU so doing trans-coding on the fly for something like PS3 Media Server would have resulted in a bad experience.

Any suggestions on alternatives?

Telex
Feb 11, 2003



anyone ever done a 1:1 disk dupe with the full installation of FreeNAS?

SMART just told me that my boot drive was going to fail today (maybe, maybe not, I'm not convinced but it has been stuttering for no fucking reason lately) so I need to replace the thing ASAP.

I don't really want to set everything up again and I have one of those hard drive docks with the two slots so you can clone one drive to another. Is FreeBSD happy with that, or does it kinda freak out if it's not the same drive?

ThePeteEffect
Jun 12, 2007

I'm just crackers about cheese!


Fun Shoe

I think this should go here rather than the enterprise storage thread.

Every month, I write stored backup data to disks that will be kept in offline cold storage save sets. Right now, I have a machine with a lot of disk bays and an old RAID controller. I create single disk units for each disk and write out data.

The hardware is getting long in the tooth, and I am looking to have something more flexible than a machine with lots of disk bays. I may move the save set processing to a VM, so something that could allow a guest (Red Hat) to mount the disks remotely would work, like iSCSI. Is there anything out there that would work?

BlackMK4
Aug 23, 2006

wat.

Megamarm

Residency Evil posted:

Anyone have any thoughts on this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...N82E16859321014 ?

I have the feeling that my old P3 1Ghz box is killing me as far as power goes. All I really want is something that I can leave in the corner and run a torrent client on that I manage via the web from my MBA and stream to boxee.

I believe I calculated out replacing a Pentium 4 2.8C with a built Atom that cost half of what you just linked and it'd take me 3 years to make up the investment with savings on the power bill... and I believe a P4 eats a shitload more power than a P3 - like two to three time as much.

BlackMK4 fucked around with this message at 03:16 on Nov 17, 2011

Longinus00
Dec 29, 2005
Ur-Quan

Residency Evil posted:

Anyone have any thoughts on this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...N82E16859321014 ?

I have the feeling that my old P3 1Ghz box is killing me as far as power goes. All I really want is something that I can leave in the corner and run a torrent client on that I manage via the web from my MBA and stream to boxee.

Get one of these and measure the power draw of your p3 box.
http://www.amazon.com/P3-Internatio...r/dp/B00009MDBU

BlackMK4
Aug 23, 2006

wat.

Megamarm

Oh, nevermind.

Mewcenary
Jan 9, 2004


I'm looking into home NAS now that I have switched to a MacBook Air as my main device. I currently use a simple USB2 external HD for extraneous files but want to move to network storage for all the obvious benefits.

A friend at work is raving about the Synology range. I see them referenced in the OP but not much when skimming through the thread right now. Any thoughts about them?

Also, there seem to be a LOT of posts from people just building their own setups. Any particular reason why this is recommended? Does it really work out a lot cheaper / smaller / less noisy than the 'black box' NAS options?

necrobobsledder
Mar 21, 2005
Lay down your soul to the gods rock 'n roll

Nap Ghost

That P3 probably uses around 80w idle but up to 110w or so when running with all the drives. This would be in contrast to about 20w - 60w for most NASes that can support 4+ drives. Depending upon how cheap power is, it actually might be cheaper to just keep running that P3 for a couple more years. I know for me it's only like 7c / kWhr and it means if I bought a $300 NAS it'd take more than 3 years for break-even ROI.

Mewcenary posted:

Also, there seem to be a LOT of posts from people just building their own setups. Any particular reason why this is recommended? Does it really work out a lot cheaper / smaller / less noisy than the 'black box' NAS options?
If you need a lot of storage (10TB+) then it is almost certainly your cheapest available option because everything in that commercial hardware range means something with 6+ drive bays and among most dedicated 'black box' NASes (QNAP, Thecus, etc.) you're looking at $800+ just for the box itself and more likely $1400+, which might perform really slowly compared to just some drives stuck into a box - even including the cost of electricity I don't think I'd spend $900 less on power throughout the life of one of these NASes because my 12TB+ file server draws maybe 25w more than these dedicated NASes (I'm assuming 3 years of service) at the cost of being noisier and a lot bigger than these boxes. Then there's people that want to be able to transcode video (say, AirVideo to your iOS devices), run VMs - just plain run a bunch of software they feel is better left on the storage device itself to conceptually run as a black box.

There's a broad spectrum of NAS-capable hardware out there fitting a variety of different needs including the HP Microserver or those Windows Home Server things like the Acer EasyStore if you need a little bit more oomph in your CPU than the usual SOHO NAS. I went with a Microserver over any Ion or Atom-based machine for my HTPC + 24/7 NAS box because I could use more CPU when running a software RAID array and for smoother menus in XBMC #1 because I found it annoying #2 because my wife is used to commercial STBs like our FIOS DVR that have barely any menu delay and start thinking something's wrong when there's a 500ms UI delay like I did before with my Ion machine. Because I could probably always use a small, power sipping box with space for 6 drives, I'll probably keep this for my 24/7 NAS and a big huge NAS that I turn on with Wake On LAN when I need some particular file in archives.

evil_bunnY
Apr 2, 2003



Mewcenary posted:

Also, there seem to be a LOT of posts from people just building their own setups. Any particular reason why this is recommended? Does it really work out a lot cheaper / smaller / less noisy than the 'black box' NAS options?
You can get pretty fancy for not a lot of money. But then you have to manage the fanciness when it breaks, so lots of people decide to live without features so they don't have to worry about shit breaking.

necrobobsledder posted:

Because I could probably always use a small, power sipping box with space for 6 drives, I'll probably keep this for my 24/7 NAS and a big huge NAS that I turn on with Wake On LAN when I need some particular file in archives.
Automated Storage Tiering to the people!

evil_bunnY fucked around with this message at 17:05 on Nov 17, 2011

Residency Evil
Jul 28, 2003

4/5 godo BRAINS


You guys are pretty spot on about the ROI. I was thinking that the P3 box is drawing a lot of power(it's a 1Ghz which I seem to remember were pretty power hungry) but I really need to look at it more closely. The real issue is that it's been running since some point in college, and currently has a hodge-podge of drives inside with 3 x 250gb drives (one of them is the boot drive) and 1x500gb, giving a total of 1.25 TB of storage. Organization is also pretty bad, with all of the drives simply mounted individually with no backup. I'm more concerned with the health of the boot drive and the age of the power supply, as I'm occasionally hearing sounds coming from it that I choose to ignore.

The main appeal of something new would be the (hopefully) decreased power draw, smaller size, and piece of mind. An ideal solution would be something like Drobo or the original WHS, which have solutions for redundant storage that seem very appealing. The old WHS probably won't run on this computer and I really can't justify paying for a networked drobo. This: http://www.amazon.com/Data-Robotics...21567278&sr=8-1 is tempting, but I imagine connecting it to my linux system would be pretty miserable.

Residency Evil fucked around with this message at 23:11 on Nov 17, 2011

devmd01
Mar 7, 2006

Elektronik
Supersonik


I went with a massive file server with nine drives because the only thing I had to pay for was the case and rma shipping for the psu and a couple of hard drives, and Indiana has some of the cheapest municipal electrical rates in the country. Decomissioned company-built whitebox ip video security whitebox servers,

I do run a dlink dns-321 with two 1tbs in jbod in the garage on the network rack for backup purposes, though.

astr0man
Feb 21, 2007

hollyeo deuroga


Nap Ghost

astr0man posted:

Are there any major drawbacks to using ZFS on Linux vs just running FreeNAS? I'm putting together a microserver based NAS and was planning on running Ubuntu Server 10.04 since I'm a lot more comfortable working in Ubuntu/Debian Linux vs FreeBSD.

Just wanted to let you guys know I ended up just going with FreeNAS. It and the microserver are awesome, thanks for all the tips.

evil_bunnY
Apr 2, 2003



Residency Evil posted:

The main appeal of something new would be the (hopefully) decreased power draw, smaller size, and piece of mind. An ideal solution would be something like Drobo or the original WHS, which have solutions for redundant storage that seem very appealing. The old WHS probably won't run on this computer and I really can't justify paying for a networked drobo. This: http://www.amazon.com/Data-Robotics...21567278&sr=8-1 is tempting, but I imagine connecting it to my linux system would be pretty miserable.
A microserver would server you well (with your choice of drives and management system on it).

evil_bunnY
Apr 2, 2003



devmd01 posted:

I went with a massive file server with nine drives because the only thing I had to pay for was the case and rma shipping for the psu and a couple of hard drives, and Indiana has some of the cheapest municipal electrical rates in the country. Decomissioned company-built whitebox ip video security whitebox servers,
I have a pair of MD1000 at home and I'm not ashamed.

roadhead
Dec 25, 2001



My Phenom II 705e + 12 1.5 TB WD green drives + cable modem / 24 port GigE switch / Router only consumes about 140-150 watts as measured by my UPS when serving say 2 SD tv shows over Samba.

I should check it's power usage during pool scrubs (FreeBSD + ZFS for life!) or SABNZBD par/rar action to get a better idea of range but honestly it spends very little time doing that over-all.

150 watts * 24 hours * 30 days @ 0.10 per kWh is less than $11 per month. So if I can cut that power usage in half I can save $5.50 every month.

Matt Zerella
Oct 7, 2002


FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 is out.

Looks like it's getting closer to a full release.

http://www.freebsd.org/news/newsfla...vent20111117:01

PopeOnARope
Jul 23, 2007

Hey! Quit touching my junk!


Cooool. So I just booted the computer today, and one of my volumes is gone.

"RAID" Card - Vantec based on SIL-3114
Storage Media - 4x 1TB WD Green HDD
Layout - RAID 10

When I booted up, all 4 disks as single, the array was gone. The IN-OS SATA RAID5 Manager shows them in PASS-THRU Mode.
Ripped and reinstalled it from device manager

0 WD10EACS-00ZJB0
1 WD10EACS-00ZJB0
2 WD10EACS-00D6B1
3 WD10EACS-00D6B1

ohgodwhatthefuckdoido.

\/ The only thing I can do is to create another array. The card doesn't detect the original array whatsoever. And I sort of didn't have a backup. I never expected the whole array to fuck off at once.

PopeOnARope fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Nov 20, 2011

Wifi Toilet
Oct 1, 2004



Toilet Rascal

PopeOnARope posted:


ohgodwhatthefuckdoido.

What options do you have in the raid manager to rebuild the array, how about in the raid card's bios?

or

Recreate the array and restore from backups?

Gorfob
Feb 10, 2007


PopeOnARope posted:

The only thing I can do is to create another array. The card doesn't detect the original array whatsoever. And I sort of didn't have a backup. I never expected the whole array to fuck off at once.

This is why I am currently looking at buying a big fuck off stack of dual layer blurays and a dual layer burner. Burn and store.

Still trying to work out how to keep new stuff sorted. TV shows are easy rip, name, art burn whole season 1 one disc. Still working out how I will keep movies done. perhaps a big one to start with then monthly disc additions.

But then you have stuff like LOTR-super-duper-extended-comes-with-a- vial-of-Peter-Jacksons-sweat-Edition that dont fit on one disc even when you tear everything apart and only put the movie into the file. I could perhaps make multi part rar or something? I don't know.

Obviously Erratic
Oct 17, 2008

Give me beauty or give me death!


So I'm looking for a little clarification/advice on how ZFS actually handles multiple arrays in a zpool. I'm a bit lost.

I've got a Ubuntu 10.4.3 VM running ZFS and am quite impressed with how simple the setup has been so far (note this is my first time trying ZFS)

So far, I have built a zpool "tank" with 3 virtual drives in ZRaid1 (3x2TB) giving me 4TB useable space. This is all well and good and completely manageable from my point of view.

Now is where I start to lose understanding of how ZFS handles arrays in a pool.
I added a second 3 drive array to "tank" - taking my useable space to 8TB - Cool! I'm not overly sure how ZFS handles this in regards to redundancy and how data is striped across the arrays?

I then decided to see what would happen if I added a single drive to the pool - this took my useable space to 10TB - which is cool but I presume this drive is completely unprotected? How is data distributed with this drive?

code:
root@oblivion:~# zfs list
NAME        USED  AVAIL  REFER  MOUNTPOINT
tank       2.67G  9.78T  40.0K  /tank
tank/myfs  2.67G  9.78T  2.67G  /tank/myfs
code:
root@oblivion:~# zpool status
  pool: tank
 state: ONLINE
 scan: scrub repaired 0 in 0h0m with 0 errors on Mon Nov 21 17:35:15 2011
config:

        NAME        STATE     READ WRITE CKSUM
        tank        ONLINE       0     0     0
          raidz1-0  ONLINE       0     0     0
            sdb     ONLINE       0     0     0
            sdc     ONLINE       0     0     0
            sdd     ONLINE       0     0     0
          raidz1-1  ONLINE       0     0     0
            sde     ONLINE       0     0     0
            sdf     ONLINE       0     0     0
            sdg     ONLINE       0     0     0
          sdh       ONLINE       0     0     0
        cache
          sdi       ONLINE       0     0     0

errors: No known data errors
Granted, I'm a complete n00b at ZFS and not overly experienced with storage as a whole. But if anyone could explain this to me, that'd be awesome. The idea of just being able to whack single drives into the pool as bandaid storage or a cheap extension sounds great - but I'm sure it's entirely dodgy and unprotected.

Zorak of Michigan
Jun 10, 2006

Waiting for his chance

ZFS stripes data across the different vdevs in the spool. Each mirrored set or RAID-Z(n) set counts as a different vdev. If you add new drives as mirrors or RAID-Z sets, the new drives have redundant storage, although each set is independent. You can't turn an existing 3 disk RAID-Z set into a 6 disk RAID-Z, you can only make it a second 3 disk RAID-Z. In your example sdi was added as a single drive, so data on it has no redundancy. If you lose it, the pool will be incomplete. This is probably not something you want to use for any data you care about.

FISHMANPET
Mar 3, 2007

Sweet 'N Sour
Can't
Melt
Steel Beams


Zorak of Michigan posted:

ZFS stripes data across the different vdevs in the spool. Each mirrored set or RAID-Z(n) set counts as a different vdev. If you add new drives as mirrors or RAID-Z sets, the new drives have redundant storage, although each set is independent. You can't turn an existing 3 disk RAID-Z set into a 6 disk RAID-Z, you can only make it a second 3 disk RAID-Z. In your example sdi was added as a single drive, so data on it has no redundancy. If you lose it, the pool will be incomplete. This is probably not something you want to use for any data you care about.

Yeah, destroy that pool and rebuild before you put it in production. Also, with only six (or 7 disks) it would be better to go with a 6 disk RaidZ2 (does ZFS on Linux support that, or are you using FUSE?) with a hotspare if you're paranoid, or just a 7 disk RAIDZ2.

Telex
Feb 11, 2003



FISHMANPET posted:

Yeah, destroy that pool and rebuild before you put it in production. Also, with only six (or 7 disks) it would be better to go with a 6 disk RaidZ2 (does ZFS on Linux support that, or are you using FUSE?) with a hotspare if you're paranoid, or just a 7 disk RAIDZ2.

I was told back in the day that you don't want to make a single RaidZ2 with drives of different models or sizes.

is that still true? Like if I have 4x1TB and 4x2TB or soon to be 4x3TB + 4x2TB, I should NOT make a single raidz2 out of those 8 drives right?

Right now I have mine split off as 4xRaidz+4xRaidz vdevs for a single pool. Works well but I haven't had a drive die yet so I don't know how well it recovers. As soon as drive prices get down to affordable for the 3TB models again I'm gonna upgrade but it'd be nice to know if I'd fuck it all up by only getting 4 instead of 8 new drives.

FISHMANPET
Mar 3, 2007

Sweet 'N Sour
Can't
Melt
Steel Beams


Telex posted:

I was told back in the day that you don't want to make a single RaidZ2 with drives of different models or sizes.

is that still true? Like if I have 4x1TB and 4x2TB or soon to be 4x3TB + 4x2TB, I should NOT make a single raidz2 out of those 8 drives right?

Right now I have mine split off as 4xRaidz+4xRaidz vdevs for a single pool. Works well but I haven't had a drive die yet so I don't know how well it recovers. As soon as drive prices get down to affordable for the 3TB models again I'm gonna upgrade but it'd be nice to know if I'd fuck it all up by only getting 4 instead of 8 new drives.

E: I'm talking about the 4x3TB + 4x2TB drives here, same principal applies for the 4x1TB and 4x2TB, just different numbers

You'd only be getting 12TB out of all those drives if you made one RAIDZ, that's the biggest reason not too. Having an 8 drive RAIDZ2 is safer than having a pair of 4 drives in RAIDZ, because with one pool, you need 3 drives to die before you lose data, but with a pair of vdevs, if two drives die in a vdev, you lose all your data. As far as models, that shouldn't be an issue. It's almost safer, because if you buy a batch of drives, if one dies, it becomes more likely they will all die similarly and in the same amount of time.

Depending on your upgrade path you could do one big pool. By the time your 12 TB array gets full, you can replace your 4 2TB disks with 4TB disks (or whatever is big at the time) and your whole pool goes up 18 TB. Upgrade your 3TB disks to 5TB disks (assuming you're 2TB disks are now 4TB disks) and you're up to 24TB. Etc etc.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
«608 »