«608 »
  • Post
  • Reply
Moey
Oct 22, 2010

I LIKE TO MOVE IT


UndyingShadow posted:

Running 4 VMs I thought it would be nice to give them 2 (or even 3) cores each?

If they don't utilize those cores they are causing more harm due to cpu scheduling (if you over allocate).

What workloads do you actually plan on running?

IOwnCalculus
Apr 2, 2003





DNova posted:

Or you could buy a good processor.

Seriously. Current AMD core does not equal current (or even one or two generations old...maybe even three?) Intel core.

SamDabbers
May 26, 2003



Fallen Rib

UndyingShadow posted:

That would be fine, except I plan to shove 8 drives into my whitebox, and that IBM only holds 4

Still, I'm starting to realize the price difference between unsupported consumer hardware and budget server hardware is a whole lot less than I thought.

Then check out the TS440. Quoting myself from several pages ago:

SamDabbers posted:

For anyone looking to build a new NAS with similar requirements, take a look at the Lenovo TS440. It comes with four 3.5" hot swap bays, and can be upgraded to eight. You'll also have to buy drive sleds, because the ones included are just dummy placeholders.
Add in your SAS HBA and a 1m SAS cable (the 8-bay upgrade comes with one) and you've got yourself a really sweet setup. It's the same internals as the TS140, but with the hotswap cages and a redundant-capable PSU. I built this same configuration in December with 8x 3TB WD Reds and it owns.

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

Nap Ghost

Also, note that a hardware thread from hyperthreading does not really perform the same as an actual core even for virtual machines and can cause some strange performance characteristics here and there (scheduling 2 vCPUs to run on two separate hardware threads across two cores when they could have been on the same core at least, which gets worse in SMP situations). However, this does not mean that 8 AMD cores > 4-core hyperthreaded Intel cores when it comes to these really easy virtualization cases. Unless you're running something like a goddamn Hadoop cluster on your server, it's unlikely for you to be actually affected by any of this besides the downsides of the AMD processor. I ran Hadoop on my E3-1230 for a while with 2 slaves and a single master because 32GB of RAM was the bigger problem for my workloads, not my CPU by a long shot (and the whole point of trying to distribute jobs is to try to better distribute the CPU load around, so not much point using stuff like Hadoop or Storm in my case).

Megaman
May 8, 2004
I didn't read the thread BUT...

I have a great little Freenas 9.3 setup with 7 1Tb disks in a RaidZ3 array, just used as dumb storage that I access every once in a while for media. The box is pretty quiet, but every once in a while it sounds like the disks are being accessed. Not a constant accessing type of drive grinding, but in short spurts, and I don't know why. The only services I run are CIFS and SMART. While the disks are churning I'm not accessing them, nor are any other computers in my apartment, nor is there a scrub running or any process that I am running over the disks, nor do I let anyone outside my network in to access anything such as this machine. What could this be? Does this happen to anyone else? Is this something that freenas does? All parts are brand new, and there are no errors on any of the disks, and the array scrubs clean. Anyone have ideas on what could be accessing the disks periodically?

UndyingShadow
May 15, 2006
You're looking ESPECIALLY shadowy this evening, Sir

Moey posted:

If they don't utilize those cores they are causing more harm due to cpu scheduling (if you over allocate).

What workloads do you actually plan on running?

IOwnCalculus posted:

Seriously. Current AMD core does not equal current (or even one or two generations old...maybe even three?) Intel core.

Okay. AMD is out.


necrobobsledder posted:

Also, note that a hardware thread from hyperthreading does not really perform the same as an actual core even for virtual machines and can cause some strange performance characteristics here and there (scheduling 2 vCPUs to run on two separate hardware threads across two cores when they could have been on the same core at least, which gets worse in SMP situations). However, this does not mean that 8 AMD cores > 4-core hyperthreaded Intel cores when it comes to these really easy virtualization cases. Unless you're running something like a goddamn Hadoop cluster on your server, it's unlikely for you to be actually affected by any of this besides the downsides of the AMD processor. I ran Hadoop on my E3-1230 for a while with 2 slaves and a single master because 32GB of RAM was the bigger problem for my workloads, not my CPU by a long shot (and the whole point of trying to distribute jobs is to try to better distribute the CPU load around, so not much point using stuff like Hadoop or Storm in my case).

The only thing that will be constant is a FreeNAS VM, a Pfsense VM for a 300mbps cable connection, and a windows server 2012 R2 for playing with. There will be others that come on and offline, for fun and testing.

I was looking at the hyperthreading Xeons, because in my mind, I'm trying to build the best, most powerful system I can. I'm considering the SUPERMICRO MBD-X10SLM+-F-O, which has 2 nics, and an IPKVM nic (which now that I know about it, seems like a really great thing to have, as I hate lugging things around to hook up consoles.) I'm also gonna look at the TS440. When you say you have to buy drive sleds, do you have to buy all 8 drive sleds, or just the 4 for the add-on cage?

Mr Shiny Pants
Nov 12, 2012


I have TS440, it is a pretty awesome machine. Comes with an SAS controller in IT mode ( mine did anyway, i have the 1245V3 version ) and has enough space for drives.

You will need caddies for all your drives, it does not come with any. They cost quite a lot in Europe, so I would buy them on Ebay or something. They can be had for like 20 bucks or something.

The case is sturdy and it feels like a quality machine. I like it very much. Oh and it is fast.........

Combat Pretzel
Jun 23, 2004

No, seriously... what kurds?!

necrobobsledder posted:

However, this does not mean that 8 AMD cores > 4-core hyperthreaded Intel cores when it comes to these really easy virtualization cases.
AMDs 8-core CPUs are some mixed clusterfuck. I think each two cores are a module that share a single x86 decoder, FPU and some other things, while having their own integer ALUs. Or some shit like that. If I were to look it up, I wouldn't be surprised to find that a hyperthreaded Intel CPU would probably mop the floor with these AMD CPUs.

UndyingShadow
May 15, 2006
You're looking ESPECIALLY shadowy this evening, Sir

Combat Pretzel posted:

AMDs 8-core CPUs are some mixed clusterfuck. I think each two cores are a module that share a single x86 decoder, FPU and some other things, while having their own integer ALUs. Or some shit like that. If I were to look it up, I wouldn't be surprised to find that a hyperthreaded Intel CPU would probably mop the floor with these AMD CPUs.

I didn't know this. Ugh. I haven't bought an AMD cpu since the core duo days, and it looks like there's absolutely no reason to, ever.

IOwnCalculus
Apr 2, 2003





UndyingShadow posted:

I didn't know this. Ugh. I haven't bought an AMD cpu since the core duo days, and it looks like there's absolutely no reason to, ever.

Pretty much, yeah. I have a couple of their netbook-level chips (one in an actual netbook that is my garage laptop, one as my pfSense box) and otherwise there's nothing compelling about anything AMD at all. They do a better job of not restricting features based on market segmentation (i.e. ECC / VT-d support) but thanks to how common it is, you can still get your hands on a used Nehalem (or newer) Xeon with a real server board and ECC RAM for the same price as a new shitty AMD CPU and the few motherboards that officially support ECC / IOMMU.

D. Ebdrup
Mar 13, 2009



UndyingShadow posted:

The only thing that will be constant is a FreeNAS VM, a Pfsense VM for a 300mbps cable connection, and a windows server 2012 R2 for playing with. There will be others that come on and offline, for fun and testing.
Do note that running between 100 and 500Mbps through pfSense requires at least 2GHz CPU on a modern Intel CPU (since AMD has been ruled out previously) according to the hardware requirements.
Meanwhile if you got 1Gbps fiber, you can pretty much get fucked like I had to(*), if you're thinking of running pfSense without an ASIC or FGPA of some description (of which very few are actually network processors which can handle routing, NAT, ipv4+6 and ACLs that are available, at least in Denmark along with being supported in FreeBSD).

*: I ended up buying an EdgeRouter Lite 3 and 3x UniFi APs with zero-handoff which have served me much better, so it worked out fine in the end.

Combat Pretzel
Jun 23, 2004

No, seriously... what kurds?!

UndyingShadow posted:

I didn't know this. Ugh. I haven't bought an AMD cpu since the core duo days, and it looks like there's absolutely no reason to, ever.
That module stuff refers to the Bulldozer and Piledriver architectures, IIRC. In Jaguar, they've gone more traditional and every core seems fully equipped. There don't seem to be fast clocked desktop/server Jaguar CPUs tho, if you want that. If you sprung for some 3GHz+ AMD CPU, it's probably a Piledriver.

--edit: Wait, I've got my shit wrong. "Steamroller" will be is the proper successor to Piledriver. And still uses the module crap, albeit tweaked some more (according to Wikipedia, anyway). You still can get Jaguar CPUs for your NAS, if you need low power CPUs.
--edit2: Apparently that shit is out already. Either way, get an Intel.

Combat Pretzel fucked around with this message at 18:33 on Jan 23, 2015

Megaman
May 8, 2004
I didn't read the thread BUT...

Megaman posted:

I have a great little Freenas 9.3 setup with 7 1Tb disks in a RaidZ3 array, just used as dumb storage that I access every once in a while for media. The box is pretty quiet, but every once in a while it sounds like the disks are being accessed. Not a constant accessing type of drive grinding, but in short spurts, and I don't know why. The only services I run are CIFS and SMART. While the disks are churning I'm not accessing them, nor are any other computers in my apartment, nor is there a scrub running or any process that I am running over the disks, nor do I let anyone outside my network in to access anything such as this machine. What could this be? Does this happen to anyone else? Is this something that freenas does? All parts are brand new, and there are no errors on any of the disks, and the array scrubs clean. Anyone have ideas on what could be accessing the disks periodically?

Bump, anyone?

Mr Shiny Pants
Nov 12, 2012


Megaman posted:

Bump, anyone?

Pull the network plug? See if it still occurs? If it does, it is something in the OS itself (cron?).

If it stops it might be a client indexing or something.

I don't know, might help you pinpoint the cause.

Megaman
May 8, 2004
I didn't read the thread BUT...

Mr Shiny Pants posted:

Pull the network plug? See if it still occurs? If it does, it is something in the OS itself (cron?).

If it stops it might be a client indexing or something.

I don't know, might help you pinpoint the cause.

Good point, I'll pull the plug, but let's say I do and it continues (which I guarantee it will), when you say cron you mean one that I put on? I put no crons on, this is a fresh install. Does Freenas come with crons I don't know about that should be running besides scrubs that I've scheduled?

Also, when you indexing, what do you mean? Does raid/freenas require some sort of indexing? I've never heard of that before.

Mr Shiny Pants
Nov 12, 2012


Megaman posted:

Good point, I'll pull the plug, but let's say I do and it continues (which I guarantee it will), when you say cron you mean one that I put on? I put no crons on, this is a fresh install. Does Freenas come with crons I don't know about that should be running besides scrubs that I've scheduled?

Also, when you indexing, what do you mean? Does raid/freenas require some sort of indexing? I've never heard of that before.

I am not familiar with Freenas so I am not sure if it creates certain cron jobs or other scheduled tasks. I can imagine that it does for reporting data usage or some other data aggregation.

Seems like it can: http://doc.freenas.org/9.3/freenas_tasks.html Maybe it has some system defined tasks that get kicked off at regular intervals and those tasks access your disks?

As for indexing, I meant a Windows system that indexes your files for searching or spotlight in OSX. As I said before, I am not familiar with Freenas, but I can imagine that these settings show up as the behavior you describe.

phosdex
Dec 16, 2005



Tortured By Flan

D. Ebdrup posted:

Do note that running between 100 and 500Mbps through pfSense requires at least 2GHz CPU on a modern Intel CPU (since AMD has been ruled out previously) according to the hardware requirements.
Meanwhile if you got 1Gbps fiber, you can pretty much get fucked like I had to(*), if you're thinking of running pfSense without an ASIC or FGPA of some description (of which very few are actually network processors which can handle routing, NAT, ipv4+6 and ACLs that are available, at least in Denmark along with being supported in FreeBSD).

*: I ended up buying an EdgeRouter Lite 3 and 3x UniFi APs with zero-handoff which have served me much better, so it worked out fine in the end.

I run pfsense on a celeron g1620 and have 1Gb fiber. I can get it to max out my bandwidth but I don't use it to vpn.

UndyingShadow
May 15, 2006
You're looking ESPECIALLY shadowy this evening, Sir

Megaman posted:

I have a great little Freenas 9.3 setup with 7 1Tb disks in a RaidZ3 array, just used as dumb storage that I access every once in a while for media. The box is pretty quiet, but every once in a while it sounds like the disks are being accessed. Not a constant accessing type of drive grinding, but in short spurts, and I don't know why. The only services I run are CIFS and SMART. While the disks are churning I'm not accessing them, nor are any other computers in my apartment, nor is there a scrub running or any process that I am running over the disks, nor do I let anyone outside my network in to access anything such as this machine. What could this be? Does this happen to anyone else? Is this something that freenas does? All parts are brand new, and there are no errors on any of the disks, and the array scrubs clean. Anyone have ideas on what could be accessing the disks periodically?

Mine does this occasionally, even when it's not being touched. I think it's just part of FreeNAS. Disk IO is gonna happen. Just enjoy the soothing sounds of your hard drives and why worry?

Muslim Wookie
Jul 6, 2005


I'm looking to replace my current homebrew NAS case with something a bit better because I'm sick of it's low build quality. What's out there with 24 drive bay (or more) capability? I had a look at Backblaze storage pods but not a fan of not having drive bays to be honest.

Combat Pretzel
Jun 23, 2004

No, seriously... what kurds?!

UndyingShadow posted:

Mine does this occasionally, even when it's not being touched. I think it's just part of FreeNAS. Disk IO is gonna happen. Just enjoy the soothing sounds of your hard drives and why worry?
When you have your system log on the disk array, it'll do that. Most of the drive noise is the activity on the RRD database used to log the telemetrics. I "fixed" it by slapping a cheap Intel SSD into the NAS and moving these things there (you can change the system log pool with a simple setting and rebooting).

Here's the system activity on my SSD:

Megaman
May 8, 2004
I didn't read the thread BUT...

One more question. I've just ordered a whole new set of 7 4TB disks to replace my existing 7 1TB disks. I read the documentation on how to replace disks, and I feel like the FreeNAS documentation although extensive, kinda sucks sometimes, it's a little vague, or maybe I'm just stupid. How do you replace a disk in FreeNAS 9.3? Do you just pull a disk to replace, insert the new disk, and wait until FreeNAS automatically resilvers it, then move onto the next disk? Or do I actually have to tell the disk I'm replacing to deactivate before removing it, then tell it to use the new disk when putting it in? How does replacing a disk work exactly? FreeNAS documentation appears to imply that it's all automatic, and all I need to do is just pull then insert. Ideas?

Boner Wad
Nov 16, 2003


mayodreams posted:

I run an almost identical setup to what you are looking to build. If you would like to do esxi, I would strongly recommend you get a board with a supported chipset (opteron/xeon) from VMware's HCL.

As for the networking, you can get away with using only 2 NICs for your setup. I have two vSwitches: WAN and LAN. Each vlan is connected to one of my onboard Intel NIC's and then to the cable modem and a gigabit switch respectfully. pFense gets two vmxnet3 (or E1000 which is easier but uses WAY more CPU cycles under load) that bridge the WAN and LAN vSwitches. I then have other gigabit switches and a 802.11AC router in bridge mode for wireless.



I also am running FreeNAS and passing through an LSI 9211-8i for an HBA. Having everything on vmxnet3 and local to VMware is awesome because it is a 40gb connection, and I've moved data from VM to VM from the FreeNAS store at 129Mb/sec.

You're running a virtualized router? Have you had any issues with that setup? I've been thinking about switching ISPs and I'd go from 30/3 to 100/5. I'd think this would keep up possibly.

Do you have a recommended setup/parts list?

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

Nap Ghost

RE: replacing disks in RAIDZ vdevs under FreeNAS

You go to the ZFS zpool under Storage, go to View Status, and from there you Offline a disk to mark the disk ID as not participating and to free up a device, replace the disk physically, then you go back to the UI and hit Replace. This is how you'd do it under ZFS via command line although once before years ago on OpenSolaris I'm not sure what happened and ZFS automatically offlined a disk for me and after I replaced it ZFS recognized the new disk and the vdev started to get resilvered. Maybe I'm completely crazy though because I likely did it at 3 am and everything blurred together.

FISHMANPET
Mar 3, 2007

Sweet 'N Sour
Can't
Melt
Steel Beams


I have a problem where I'm trying to put some bigger drives into my linux server, but the system isn't seeing them.

I had a 750gb drive and it was visible, and then I replaced it with a WD Red 3TB and the system doesn't see it. I've already got a bunch of them in the system, some on the onboard controller, some on my M1015. lshw shows the missing drive is hooked up to the M1015 but I'm not sure what else to look at. I've got the drives in a 5-in-3 enclosure, could it be a power issue? Anything else I should try and look at?

Bishyaler
Dec 30, 2009

Escape will make me god.

Megamarm

What's the preferred cloud backup service around these parts? Crashplan? Backblaze? I have about 2-3TB of data I would like not to disappear in the unfortunate event of a house fire or flood.

sleepy gary
Jan 11, 2006



Crashplan.

Lisa needs backups.

IOwnCalculus
Apr 2, 2003





Crashplan, yet again.

FISHMANPET posted:

I have a problem where I'm trying to put some bigger drives into my linux server, but the system isn't seeing them.

I had a 750gb drive and it was visible, and then I replaced it with a WD Red 3TB and the system doesn't see it. I've already got a bunch of them in the system, some on the onboard controller, some on my M1015. lshw shows the missing drive is hooked up to the M1015 but I'm not sure what else to look at. I've got the drives in a 5-in-3 enclosure, could it be a power issue? Anything else I should try and look at?

What do you mean it can't be seen? Does it not have a /dev/sdx assigned to it as a logical name when it shows up in lshw?

FISHMANPET
Mar 3, 2007

Sweet 'N Sour
Can't
Melt
Steel Beams


Nope, there's no indication that the drive is physically plugged in. lshw shows 7 drives connected to my M1015, when I in fact 8 drives. parted only shows 12 physical drives when I have 13. There's no /dev/sdx entry. Just, nothing. I'm not sure if there's any other ways for me to try and probe the controllers. I guess I should also look at the POST messages to see if it shows up there.

IOwnCalculus
Apr 2, 2003





Oh, I read your first post as if it was showing up in lshw. Assuming your M1015 is in IT mode, there's nothing else to do beyond just plugging a drive in.

I'd plug it into another box just to rule as much as possible out, but DOA is always a possibility.

FISHMANPET
Mar 3, 2007

Sweet 'N Sour
Can't
Melt
Steel Beams


This happened to me before, when I tried to get my two raid sets to each live nicely in their own enclosure. (I had 5x3TB and 5x1.5TB plus 2x250gb and an empty slot then) I had to mix them up to get them to work. So it's not a dead drive issue, could there be some kind of power issue? I don't know how much more power a 3TB drive takes over some other older drive.

drk
Jan 16, 2005


Hate to beat a topic to death, but why does FreeNAS "require 8GB" of RAM and Nas4Free suggest an "minimum of 1GB with ZFS"? I'm thinking of buying a N54L which comes with 4GB RAM... replacing it with 8GB is +~$90 on a $180 machine, which is a harder sell.

Going to be using this a light-duty office storage server, primarily as a backup target and some other light interoffice file sharing stuff for 4 users. Somewhere between 2 x 2TB and 3 x 3TB of storage.

Will 4GB be a performance killer for a relatively light usage NAS? My old synology at home doesn't seem to have problems pushing nearly gigabit speeds with 256MB RAM. Is ZFS that RAM hungry?

sleepy gary
Jan 11, 2006



drk posted:

Hate to beat a topic to death, but why does FreeNAS "require 8GB" of RAM and Nas4Free suggest an "minimum of 1GB with ZFS"? I'm thinking of buying a N54L which comes with 4GB RAM... replacing it with 8GB is +~$90 on a $180 machine, which is a harder sell.

Going to be using this a light-duty office storage server, primarily as a backup target and some other light interoffice file sharing stuff for 4 users. Somewhere between 2 x 2TB and 3 x 3TB of storage.

Will 4GB be a performance killer for a relatively light usage NAS? My old synology at home doesn't seem to have problems pushing nearly gigabit speeds with 256MB RAM. Is ZFS that RAM hungry?

It's a best-practices kind of thing. Without compression and deduplication, 4GB of RAM will probably be completely fine.

edit: I don't like the idea of 2x2TB. Get at least 3x1TB in RAIDZ-1 (total usable space 2TB). I'd recommend a 4-drive RAIDZ-2.

edit: Ok 4-drive RAIDZ-2 might be overkill for you, but get at least 3 drives in a RAIDZ-1.

sleepy gary fucked around with this message at 22:44 on Jan 26, 2015

GokieKS
Dec 15, 2012

Mostly Harmless.


4GB of RAM will be fine for 4-6 TB of usable space in a office use setting.

drk
Jan 16, 2005


DNova posted:

It's a best-practices kind of thing. Without compression and deduplication, 4GB of RAM will probably be completely fine.

edit: I don't like the idea of 2x2TB. Get at least 3x1TB in RAIDZ-1 (total usable space 2TB). I'd recommend a 4-drive RAIDZ-2.

edit: Ok 4-drive RAIDZ-2 might be overkill for you, but get at least 3 drives in a RAIDZ-1.

Thanks for the thoughts. Any reason a 3-drive RAID Z1 is preferable to a simple 2 drive mirrored setup? If price was no object, it would obviously be a more efficient use of space. I'm trying to pitch the idea to the new job I am working at, where their idea of backing up is: 1) nothing or 2) dragging around a shitty external USB drive when they remember to do it. Of course, the external option is probably going to die before the computers it is backing up, since those drives are almost universally terrible.

Since the N54L has 4 drive bays, I am also assuming it is easier to expand storage needs in the future by adding 2 drives to 2, versus adding 1 drive to 3, though I haven't worked out exactly how I'd go about that.

sleepy gary
Jan 11, 2006



drk posted:

Thanks for the thoughts. Any reason a 3-drive RAID Z1 is preferable to a simple 2 drive mirrored setup? If price was no object, it would obviously be a more efficient use of space. I'm trying to pitch the idea to the new job I am working at, where their idea of backing up is: 1) nothing or 2) dragging around a shitty external USB drive when they remember to do it. Of course, the external option is probably going to die before the computers it is backing up, since those drives are almost universally terrible.

Since the N54L has 4 drive bays, I am also assuming it is easier to expand storage needs in the future by adding 2 drives to 2, versus adding 1 drive to 3, though I haven't worked out exactly how I'd go about that.

If you need to spend as little as possible now and have an eye towards expansion in the near future, then a 2-disk mirror is maybe the way to go. Later, you can add another mirror of 2 disks to the pool. It's not a great solution but it's better than a shitty external drive that is going to get dropped at some point.

Generic Monk
Oct 31, 2011



was looking at NAS options over the past few days; currently I'm using my main PC to serve files which is... less than optimal especially since all my media, photos etc is on two 5 year old shitty seagates in RAID-0. originally was going to build some ridiculous thing using a DS380, xeon etc but I think I'll start small since my use case for something like that is... shaky at best.

heard good things about the hp microservers - the newest model (gen8) seems to have an upgradable cpu and looks a little nicer, is there anything majorly wrong with it that I should know before I pull the trigger? would it also be possible to put a low end i3/xeon in it sometime in the future in case i wanted to do a plex transcode or two? without causing a house fire

sleepy gary
Jan 11, 2006



Generic Monk posted:

all my media, photos etc is on two 5 year old shitty seagates in RAID-0.

Why would you do this? Why? Why?

quote:

heard good things about the hp microservers - the newest model (gen8) seems to have an upgradable cpu and looks a little nicer, is there anything majorly wrong with it that I should know before I pull the trigger? would it also be possible to put a low end i3/xeon in it sometime in the future in case i wanted to do a plex transcode or two? without causing a house fire

Yes lots of people have put Xeons in their Gen8 Microservers. Here is one example: http://homeservershow.com/hp-prolia...pu-upgrade.html

Generic Monk
Oct 31, 2011



DNova posted:

Why would you do this? Why? Why?

Also note that these are the Barracuda 7200.11 drives that shipped with a firmware defect that caused them to randomly drop out of arrays. They did this about 3 times before I just used a win8 storage space (sigh) to patch together something that seemed to work. At this point I'm just not fucking with it until I have a more permanent solution, everything irreplaceable is in a dropbox or dropbox-like anyway.

Also that's great; nice to know I have my options open - as open as the ebay market for discontinued CPUs is anyway. Pulled the trigger, though I see myself spending twice the cost of the bare server on drives and RAM anyway

Krailor
Nov 2, 2001
I'm only pretending to care

Taco Defender

Generic Monk posted:

heard good things about the hp microservers - the newest model (gen8) seems to have an upgradable cpu and looks a little nicer, is there anything majorly wrong with it that I should know before I pull the trigger? would it also be possible to put a low end i3/xeon in it sometime in the future in case i wanted to do a plex transcode or two? without causing a house fire

Damn, that's a nice deal on that box.

Spermanent Record
Mar 28, 2007
I interviewed a NK escapee who came to my school and made a thread. Then life got in the way and the translation had to be postponed. I did finish it in the end, but nobody is going to pay 10 bux to update my.avatar

I just decided to upgrade my ancient Dlink DNS323 after nearly 8 years of solid, but very slow use. Synology 215j should arrive tomorrow.

Does anyone know if I have to reformat the drives I'm using when I put them in the Synology?

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