Just finished my new Terrabyte Server

BigJimbo

Golden Member
Aug 4, 2002
1,193
0
0
Just finished my new server

1.1 athlon
Soyo Dragon 2 KT800
40gig WD Dual boot XP/2003
5x 200 gig WD 7200 8mb (4 on RAID 0)
550 Watt Antec PSU


PICS HERE
 

XZeroII

Lifer
Jun 30, 2001
12,572
0
0
You put your OS on the 40 gig??????? You crazy??? Put that sucker on the raid array!!!
 

yoda291

Diamond Member
Aug 11, 2001
5,079
0
0
raid 5 would put him short of a tera

and I don't think the load will be enough to watch the performance metrics of the OS's location make a difference.
 

Trygve

Golden Member
Aug 1, 2001
1,428
9
0
Originally posted by: Anubis
why a raid 0 array?

do raid 5 you silly person,

and put the OS on the damn array

Four IDE drives running RAID 0 would scare me, unless it was just for temporary space (video capture/layback, etc.). These days most of the servers I set up have a pair of RAID 1 drives for the OS and logfiles, and 3 or more drives in RAID 5 for the data files. (In the old days, I used to dedicate a drive for logfiles, but one fundamental problem with that is that even though losing the data won't break your heart, losing that one drive would bring down the server. Had that happen too many times. Besides, drives are much bigger, faster, and cheaper than they used to be.)
 

remagavon

Platinum Member
Jun 16, 2003
2,516
0
0
Nice!

OT (on topic :p) Does anyone know a fullproof way to share files? I always seem to have one PC that can't see another one on my network, like one PC will see all of them but another will only see one, not the other. It's very weird and I'd love to have a method to actually get file sharing to work! I'd seriously consider building a file server then.

Thanks :)
 

Trygve

Golden Member
Aug 1, 2001
1,428
9
0
Originally posted by: Ketteringo
Dont use raid, it's useless.

Depends on your needs, I suppose. If you like speed and reliability, it can help a lot.
 

BigJimbo

Golden Member
Aug 4, 2002
1,193
0
0
raid 5 card was 105$ that RAID screen shot i took was when i was transfering data to the array. im at 50% on it now and a mirrored would be full...so id have to buy more drives.

no pron on this server


also the server doesnt need to be on the raid as its just really a file server. nothing is really processed and i dont like multiple drives....one large drive is plenty
 

Viper GTS

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
38,107
433
136
I seriously hope that terabyte of data is disposable.

That's a disaster waiting to happen.

Viper GTS
 

n0cmonkey

Elite Member
Jun 10, 2001
42,936
1
0
I've been thinking about doing something like this, but I'd definitely want another kind of raid.

Still have to work on my backup procedures anyhow...
 

Viper GTS

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
38,107
433
136
Originally posted by: BigJimbo
raid 5 card was 105$ that RAID screen shot i took was when i was transfering data to the array. im at 50% on it now and a mirrored would be full...so id have to buy more drives.

no pron on this server


also the server doesnt need to be on the raid as its just really a file server. nothing is really processed and i dont like multiple drives....one large drive is plenty

Are you seriously that naive?

RAID5 is what keeps you from losing the entire array when one drive takes a crap. You can still have it be one huge volume if you want, but 4 drives in RAID0 is just ASKING for lost data.

I will never again run RAID0, especially not with WD SE drives. They aren't exactly known for longevity.

Viper GTS
 

yoda291

Diamond Member
Aug 11, 2001
5,079
0
0
Originally posted by: Viper GTS
Originally posted by: BigJimbo
raid 5 card was 105$ that RAID screen shot i took was when i was transfering data to the array. im at 50% on it now and a mirrored would be full...so id have to buy more drives.

no pron on this server


also the server doesnt need to be on the raid as its just really a file server. nothing is really processed and i dont like multiple drives....one large drive is plenty

Are you seriously that naive?

RAID5 is what keeps you from losing the entire array when one drive takes a crap. You can still have it be one huge volume if you want, but 4 drives in RAID0 is just ASKING for lost data.

I will never again run RAID0, especially not with WD SE drives. They aren't exactly known for longevity.

Viper GTS

Well, now all he needs is to buy a tape library, lots of tape, and spare drives and he should be peachy.
 

Trygve

Golden Member
Aug 1, 2001
1,428
9
0
Originally posted by: yoda291
Originally posted by: Viper GTS
RAID5 is what keeps you from losing the entire array when one drive takes a crap. You can still have it be one huge volume if you want, but 4 drives in RAID0 is just ASKING for lost data.

I will never again run RAID0, especially not with WD SE drives. They aren't exactly known for longevity.

Viper GTS

Well, now all he needs is to buy a tape library, lots of tape, and spare drives and he should be peachy.

I'm still using DLT for most of my backups here, but that's because I have several drives and hundreds of the tapes. If I were starting from scratch, I'd probably get myself a pile-o-cheap-drives and throw them into a heap-o-cheap external USB cases. (I tried mounting some IDE hot-swap trays into 5-1/4" USB enclosures the other day, but the enclosures I had were all too short. It seemed like a good idea at the time, though.)
 

Anubis

No Lifer
Aug 31, 2001
78,712
427
126
tbqhwy.com
Originally posted by: Viper GTS
Originally posted by: BigJimbo
raid 5 card was 105$ that RAID screen shot i took was when i was transfering data to the array. im at 50% on it now and a mirrored would be full...so id have to buy more drives.

no pron on this server


also the server doesnt need to be on the raid as its just really a file server. nothing is really processed and i dont like multiple drives....one large drive is plenty

Are you seriously that naive?

RAID5 is what keeps you from losing the entire array when one drive takes a crap. You can still have it be one huge volume if you want, but 4 drives in RAID0 is just ASKING for lost data.

I will never again run RAID0, especially not with WD SE drives. They aren't exactly known for longevity.

Viper GTS

exactly thats the whole point of raid 5, and HDDs today are built better and dont die as much, running 3 or 4 in raid 5 is the best way to go
total redundency
 

Evadman

Administrator Emeritus<br>Elite Member
Feb 18, 2001
30,990
5
81
I was going to do the same thing, except with 5 250 GB drives and Raid 5. Running that in Raid 0 is one of the most ignorant things I have seen in a while.