Server Build

[KingGheedora]

Originally posted by: yuppiejr
The onboard ICH9r controller will do an adequate job for a basic STORAGE array where speed is less important than capacity and reliability. Just throw your maxtors on there and be done with it. Why would you waste processing power in the array controller that you are using for maximum performance for your database test array to manage bulk storage? Idiotic...

You obviously know enough to be dangerous but not enough to be competent at designing your own workstation . You're out of your league, trying to design a "do everything" Gaming PC/Workstation/Test Server on a shoestring budget and so far the only parts you managed to buy were totally unsuitable for your goal in building this monster. You obviously read benchmarks but have no idea how to apply them in choosing what parts to buy or how they will impact other devices in the system.

The 3Ware + 2 Raptors in a RAID 0 array will give you what you asked for originally, a sub $800 storage array suitable for query testing of 150+ gig databases as quickly as possible. The rest of your system is pretty much a vanilla Quad / 4 gig basic gaming box - as long as the mobo has an extra 4x capable PCIe slot you're good to go.

At this point I think you need to identify ALL of your requirements (everything you possibly want this PC to do) along with a budget in this thread and let some people who know what they are doing put together a component list. Until you nail down specific requirements and a budget this thread, and the other 2 you created on the same topic are going to continue in perpetuity without settling on a design that will work for you. Or simply order the parts you think will work right now and we'll move on to helping other people...

Man, no need to insult me. I'm asking questions, and trying to figure things out. I'm not going to do what people tell me without understanding why. The haughtiness of your post is totally unnecessary.

I admit a couple things have changed, but I put forth my budget for storage and it has not changed. I checked the sizes of the databases I'll be copying to this machine and they are about 250GB. Additional space is then needed for temp db, transformed data, and the cube data that would be generated, and I need more than 400GB, 600 ideal just to be safe and to account for growth of the db over the next few months. It is my fault I didn't check the size beforehand. But that's why I updated the OP with the new size a day or two ago, and why I got the Maxtors -- I can't afford the 4x Raptors it would take to get up to that size, wouldn't have money left for a controller.

I am still considering your suggestion though, of using the maxtors as storage and getting raptors. I might be able to spring for three raptors (over budget a little) plus the 3ware, and add a fourth as data base grows over time.

As for putting both RAID arrays on the same controller, remember this isn't a server. I don't have multiple users using this machine. I only need the fast disk performance when I'm running my analysis and doing database builds. Won't be accessing the storage array during that time. Look at this page, RAID5 with an onboard controller write speeds are pathetic, worse than USB: Text

I'm not really trying to build a gaming machine at all. As you see I'm going with onboard video and sound (though I notice that most boards I've looked at don't have onboard video, I thought this was a common thing, I will get some 50 or 60$ video card. The starcraft comment was more of a joke.

 

[KingGheedora]

Bump, updates to the OP

 

[yuppiejr]

- The Sony/Optiarc 18x SATA burner is a good choice on the cheap, you could also look at a PATA drive but since they pretty much all under $40 shipped, why go with the older interface?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16827131047

- CPU Cooler - your Q6600 will come with an adequate Intel branded cooler, if you're looking to save $50 or so short term you can just use the stock cooler until you have more money to work with. No sense overclocking your brand new rig until you've got it set up and stable for a month or two anyway. Otherwise, the Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro is always a good option for less than $30 from eWiz:

http://www.ewiz.com/detail.php?name=FAN-AC7PRO

- Motherboard wise, the Abit is significantly less expensive than the Gigabyte ($50) and feature wise has an extra Gig-E ethernet adapter and 2 eSATA ports while the Gigabyte gives you one extra PCIe 1x slot. IMHO - the Abit is the better buy, particularly if you're trying to stick to a budget.

- Video - The MSI 7300 LE based PCIe 16x video board with 128 megs of RAM for $30.99 sounds like a good budget choice - avoid the "Turbomemory' equipped cards (which includes some x300's) since these will negatively impact your system's RAM performance.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16814127273

- On the topic of RAID solutions... obviously I have a rather passionate view on the matter (I still think the 4-port 3Ware 9650SE-4LPML card is the best choice for your application), and I did some research last night into the abysmal RAID 5 performance using on board solutions that people keep reporting.

The issue I've found that lots of people are dealing with has more to do with lack of clear understanding around configuring the various components when building an array than a problem with the array controller's ability to perform. Here are some items I think you should read:

Microsoft KB Article Discussing Slow "Software" Disk Performance

StorageReview discussion of poor Nvidia RAID performance.

.. the SR article is where I found the information that makes me highly skeptical of the notion that on board RAID controllers can not handle high speed writes as some benchmark sites seem to indicate. The StorageReview post includes references to the ICH7/8R southbridges being capable of 120 MB/s WRITE performance on RAID5 arrays. I am starting to think a lot of the poor performances stats out there have more to do with the stripe/cluster/partition offset "alignment" issues that the SR article and Microsoft KB articles describe... or the use of 4 versus 3 or 5 disk RAID5 arrays.

I tested this theory on my own Nforce 430 southbridge based mainboard (a much poorer RAID controller than the Intel ICHxR series) and was able to mirror the poor "before" performance (20-30 MB/s max write speeds) and resolve the issue by following the articles instructions (180 MB/s burst, 88 MB/s average with 3 x mismatched 7.2k SATA HDD's).

Short version - configure your array with 32k stripe sizes, use the Microsoft KB article instructions to set up the partition offset properly <this is the most critical step> and then format the drives with a 64k cluster size. One HUGE caveat though... these steps are only relevant if you are running a 3 or 5 disk RAID5 array. In your case, this leaves you with either a spare drive, or with a situation where you could just go with a RAID 0+1 configuration which may be faster anyway and net you the same net disk space with a little extra redundancy.

- As for your operating system, I think you are going to want either a dual boot setup with Vista 64 (games + day to day tasks) and Server 2003 64 (your testing tasks)... or you will want to figure out some combination of virtual machines using the host O/S that will give the best overall performance. If you don't plan to mess around with gaming right now you are probably better off going with Server 2003 and just add Vista later when you buy a better video board.

As for drivers - I suggest you get an excel spreadsheet of your planned hardware together and start hitting the mfgr. sites for each and every device to verify driver availability. You're not dealing with any random legacy hardware that I can see so I don't expect issues but it will be good to check. Might as well download everything you'll need and toss it on a DVD or thumb drive so you've got all of the drivers on hand when it's time to load software after your build.

 

[KingGheedora]

Bump, updated with all parts

 

[imported_Leinad]

Areca's site indicates that the 1210/20 are compatible with XP/2000. Do these function in 64 bit Vista?