Buying or Building a home nas

[mfenn]

For $800 get the Synology DS1503+. It DOES have error protection and uses ECC memory. It also has tons of app addons that make other tasks useful (cloud storage, webhosting, etc). It can hold 5 hardrives (upgrade to more if you want with drive cages) and Synology is the best NAS you can buy.

I've did the research myself lately and decided building a server now-a-days is not worth it, not many great easy to use free options anymore since windows home server is no more (well not newer).

For what you want its PERFECT. I use mine for Sickbeard/CP/SABnsbd and data storage. I pick the directory i want and it uploads to the cloud as well.

Do you mean the DS1513+? I searched on DS1503+ and got two hits, one being this thread. I see no mention of ECC memory or a checksumming filesystem on the DS1513+ product page. Link to details?

 

[Stuka85]

im interested to know too.

 

[Stuka85]

looking today at the differente ECC rams, i saw ECC unbuffered and ECC Buffered, or registered or unregistered, to have full ECC correction under ZFS in freenas the ECC unbuffered will work??

 

[MongGrel]

Why ya even worried about ECC to be honest to begin with.

*scratches head*

You're not launching a satellite.

 

[Cerb]

looking today at the differente ECC rams, i saw ECC unbuffered and ECC Buffered, or registered or unregistered, to have full ECC correction under ZFS in freenas the ECC unbuffered will work??

Unbuffered = Unregistered. Originally, a simple register was used to buffer the clocked signals, and thus the name. Today, they're specially made. Buffered ECC protects basically all data-carrying lines. IIRC, unbuffered doesn't protect addressing.

Full? No. Much more than without it? Yes. Also, registered RAM is generally only supported on, "real server," hardware.

Why ya even worried about ECC to be honest to begin with.

*scratches head*

You're not launching a satellite.

Irrelevant. Launching a satellite wouldn't need ECC any more or less than your personal information would. It's all a matter of how far you are willing to go to try to ensure long-term correctness, most importantly including the ability to detect incorrect information existing. With recent revelations, I can't say there is a particular right or wrong choice, just a question of money and time v. risk (which starts fairly low, with a checksumming FS like ZFS, if you have RAID > 0 or backups).

 

[mfenn]

looking today at the differente ECC rams, i saw ECC unbuffered and ECC Buffered, or registered or unregistered, to have full ECC correction under ZFS in freenas the ECC unbuffered will work??

Buffered and registered are different terms for the same thing. Though unregistered RAM is typically called "unbuffered" and registered RAM is typically called "registered". Why? I guess because using consistent terminology would be too difficult.

ECC memory and registered memory serve different purposes. ECC memory is designed to be error detecting and correcting as you know.

Registered memory serves an orthogonal purpose: it's designed to reduce capacitive load on the memory controller. The way it does this is by keeping a little bit of fast memory (a register) on the DIMM. This register acts as an intermediary between the memory controller and the actual DRAM chips, effectively reducing the number of chips that the memory controller "sees". This load reduction is typically parlayed into being able to add more DIMMs to a system, increasing total memory capacity.

The two technologies could be mixed and matched in any combination, but in reality, you never see a non-ECC registered DIMM.

A typical desktop board doesn't have enough memory slots for registered memory to become a factor at all. So buy unbuffered ECC DIMMs and enjoy the cheap(er) prices!

 

[Stuka85]

thanks mfenn so i just have to buy unregistered ECC, so registered ECC are for huge servers with 10+ memory slots?

 

[mfenn]

That's correct.

 

[BarkingGhostar]

WD Reds are also 5400RPM, which means they're slow. The idea of RAID is that you don't care if a drive fails, and by buying the least expensive drive, you are self insuring even after the warranty period.

Hmm, such an absolute statement that is not entirely true. For instance, if one is performing RAID 0 (striping) then one most definitely cares if a drive fails as it essentially destroys half the data. Other forms of RAID have fault tolerance, but this one doesn't.

And speaking of 'idea' in RAID, some isn't for the protection of data as it is for the read/write performance increase.

 

[smitbret]

Hmm, such an absolute statement that is not entirely true. For instance, if one is performing RAID 0 (striping) then one most definitely cares if a drive fails as it essentially destroys half the data. Other forms of RAID have fault tolerance, but this one doesn't.

And speaking of 'idea' in RAID, some isn't for the protection of data as it is for the read/write performance increase.

Well, if we're nitpicking, RAID 0 isn't really RAID.

RAID should be used to guarantee uptime and you can expect speed benefits with the right setup. RAID should never be relied upon for data protection.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Hmm, such an absolute statement that is not entirely true. For instance, if one is performing RAID 0 (striping) then one most definitely cares if a drive fails as it essentially destroys half the data. Other forms of RAID have fault tolerance, but this one doesn't.

And speaking of 'idea' in RAID, some isn't for the protection of data as it is for the read/write performance increase.

More importantly, even a 5400 rpm HD is (probably) going to be latency-limited by the network, and come pretty close to saturating 1GbE for sequential transfers. So the Reds might not be "fast" but for their intended use (NAS appliances) they're fast enough.

If you're dropping 10GbE into things or aggregating multiple 1GbE, chances are you're dropping enough spindles into the enclosure to, again, saturate that connection.

 

[mfenn]

Well, if we're nitpicking, RAID 0 isn't really RAID.

:thumbsup: "RAID" 0 fails the Redundant part of RAID. It should be called 0 RAID, cause that's what you get. :awe:

 

[Stuka85]

Thanks for your help, finally went with this build

http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx?WishListNumber=25574946

 

[mfenn]

Thanks for your help, finally went with this build

http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx?WishListNumber=25574946

Looks nice! How did the build go?

 

[Stuka85]

I just bought it from newegg last tuesday, and i have to take it over to colombia after it ships! give me 15 days and ill tell you!

 

[mfenn]

I just bought it from newegg last tuesday, and i have to take it over to colombia after it ships! give me 15 days and ill tell you!

Fair enough!

 

[Stuka85]

everything is up and running and i started to pass all my information to it. ill set up the plex plug in after i have my information on the server.

i have been trying to use the IPMI option of my board but it have been imposible to use it, i have downloaded 2 IPMI programs from Supermicro and they dont work, one start a Command line window and then it close after a second, and the second one doesnt have an EXE so im kind of lost here. ive tried to search for a guide.. o another ppl having my issue and i cant find anything.

 

[Stuka85]

just got to type the ip adress of the IPMI on the browser and that was it

 

[mfenn]

just got to type the ip adress of the IPMI on the browser and that was it

:thumbsup: The command line IPMI programs are for scripting/automation or when you're working on a machine with no graphics. For single-system administration, the web interface works fine.

 

[Stuka85]

im getting 15 or 17MB on writing maybe i need more ram?

i got the 4 hard drives in RAIDZ2

the server is connected to a wireles router DLINK DIR 868L at 1gb. and my laptop has an intel AC card and the signal is at 83% windows reports a 486mb speed. you guys thing is low ram memory or the wireless lan?

 

[dave_the_nerd]

17MB/sec for a file transfer over WiFi is actually quite good. (Even with a supposed 486Mb connection.)

WiFi sucks for NAS applications.

Plug in into ethernet on both ends and see what happens. With that kind of hardware, you should be able to more or less saturate your network connection. (I'd expect to see file transfers in the 80+ MBps range.)

 

[mfenn]

17MB/sec for a file transfer over WiFi is actually quite good. (Even with a supposed 486Mb connection.)

WiFi sucks for NAS applications.

Plug in into ethernet on both ends and see what happens. With that kind of hardware, you should be able to more or less saturate your network connection. (I'd expect to see file transfers in the 80+ MBps range.)

Agree. WiFi on the server is going to be really bad. Remember that with WiFi, space is the shared medium, so each device can only use 1/2 of the bandwidth (assuming 2 devices, it gets worse with more).