Server or Network Attached Storage ???

[21stHermit]

I do most of my computing from my laptop. However, as a digital photographer, I need large and ever increasing storage. Currently my online storage needs approach 1TB with annual increases of around 500GB.

Will I be better off using a server attached via 802.11g or 10/100 Ethernet, OR using a NAS solution attached via USB or FireWire?

There are likely other solutions I haven't considered. Your thoughts or Ideas?

Hermit

 

[anarchyreigns]

Take a look at Maxtors Shared Storage Drive:

http://www.maxtor.com/_files/maxtor/en_...entation/data_sheets/mss_datasheet.pdf

 

[cmetz]

21stHermit, build a white box PC based file server. If I were doing it, I would build it using Linux, software RAID 5, and serial ATA. A Semperon or Celeron motherboard/chip, 512MB memory, and Intel Pro/1000MT will get you the basic system. Buy a good power supply - Antec is safe, do some research on Seasonic and Sparkle or Forton for some other ideas - but in a big file server the power supply really matters if you want your hard drives to last. Get a big case with very good cooling, look very carefully at the cooling because again that really matters if you want your hard drives to last. If your budget is bigger, consider Supermicro's pre-integrated systems, they have motherboard, CPU HSF, case, power supply, and serial ATA backplane. They're more expensive than if you cut a lot of corners and did it yourself, but their stuff is really really solid and they've done the thermal work for you. You see a lot of Supermicro chassis in data centers.

Software RAID 5 and a Promise SATA controller will work pretty well, if your budget is bigger consider a 3Ware or LSI SATA RAID card (the Adaptec ones are junk, though). Drive wise, I strongly recommend the Seagate 7200.7 drives, but 'net reports on the newer/bigger 7200.8 drives are that they are not nearly as reliable. I have had a lot of problems with Maxtor recently and would rule them right out. Western Digital is okay, not great. Hitachi might be okay again, a lot of people like their newer drives, but after the whole IBM Deathstar debacle I'm not sure I'd trust that company's products even if it's owned by someone else.

Why a real server? Because you spend more up front, but then it's cheaper to add lots of capacity, mostly just adding drives. Also, you have some control over the software aspects of things, instead of being trapped on whatever firmware the vendor ships and whatever bugs/limitations that has.

I would put a server on 1000BaseT serving SMB/CIFS and/or NFS depending on your desktop OS of choice.

Oh, and think carefully about how you are going to back all this up. One solution that's expensive but not all that crazy is to build yet another file server. If you have the bandwidth, consider putting it somewhere off-site. Backing up a couple of gigs isn't cheap!

 

[21stHermit]

Originally posted by: cmetz
21stHermit, build a white box PC based file server. . . . .

Oh, and think carefully about how you are going to back all this up. One solution that's expensive but not all that crazy is to build yet another file server. If you have the bandwidth, consider putting it somewhere off-site. Backing up a couple of gigs isn't cheap!

cmetz,

Thanks for the considerable thought you've given to my problem.

I want to reread your suggestions several more times, tomorrow, to internalize what your saying. I may have a few specific questions after more thought.

As to backup, I currently write every RAW photo file to both a +R & -R DVD as soon as I return from the field. I could recover, with some difficulty, everything from these originals.

Inasmuch as I live Off-the-Grid, my total energy budget is very small (~3KWHr/day), hence this box would likely run on average only 2-hours per day.

Thanks again,
Hermit

 

[JackMDS]

Just to clarify few issues.

The simplest way would be to buy a large drive in USB enclosure plug it to the Laptop USB port and copy the files to it as a form secure storage. If your computer id USB2.0 capable you can use USB2 enclosure and it will be fast simple method to back up for a cost of about $100-$150 per enclosure. Such a method is fast and simple and it is not considered as a NAS.

NAS is Network Attached Storage. I.e. the files are stored on a device that is attached to a Network and can be reached by any computer on the Network.

Typically NAS can be a form of File server (as described in the post above), or a special appliance (not a computer) that is Network able connected the Network Switch and be used through the network by any network Computer.

Example for NAS Appliances: Network Attached Storage (NAS) for Home/SOHO Networks.

It would not be advisable to use a NAS and connect to it via Wireless. Wireless is too slow and not as safe and stable as wire.


The solution would depend on money and whether you want to store every thing on line being always accessible.

If you do need terabytes of information always accessible, the server RAID solution is probably the one to go with.

:sun:

 

[21stHermit]

Originally posted by: cmetz
21stHermit, build a white box PC based file server. If I were doing it, I would build it using Linux, software RAID 5, and serial ATA.

Software RAID 5 and a Promise SATA controller will work pretty well,

Why a real server? Because you spend more up front, but then it's cheaper to add lots of capacity, mostly just adding drives. Also, you have some control over the software aspects of things, instead of being trapped on whatever firmware the vendor ships and whatever bugs/limitations that has.

cmetz,

Where/What software RAID 5 did you have in mind? Will the software solution allow me to add more drives to increase capacity?
I looked briefly at a LaCie 1TB disk [4 - 250's in a box] just hammered on Amazon.

Hermit

 

[erwos]

I had roughly the same problem, sans the energy constraints. I ended up buying a four bay IEEE1394 enclosure, four racks, and four hard drives. A little software RAID 5 magic later, and I had my storage issues solved. I don't know if Windows can handle soft RAID 5 - but if it can, I'd recommend my solution. Theoretically, it's four times faster than ethernet, yet doesn't incur the nasty premium of a real NAS. Bad news is, you've got to assemble it yourself.

If you want a pre-built solution, both Infrant and Buffalo Tech offer a terabyte in RAID 5 and gigabit ethernet for $1500 or so.

-Erwos

 

[21stHermit]

Originally posted by: erwos
I had roughly the same problem, sans the energy constraints. I ended up buying a four bay IEEE1394 enclosure, four racks, and four hard drives. A little software RAID 5 magic later, and I had my storage issues solved. I don't know if Windows can handle soft RAID 5 - but if it can, I'd recommend my solution. Theoretically, it's four times faster than ethernet, yet doesn't incur the nasty premium of a real NAS. Bad news is, you've got to assemble it yourself.

Erwos

I'm very interested. You mention "nasty premium of a real NAS" could you please expand on this.

As to building it myself, prefer this path, where I live repairs are difficult to impossible, by building things myself I'm able to learn more and fix things as needed.

What is your RAID controller? Or is that software RAID inside your PC/Mac/Linux box?

While typing this I had an Ah-ha, I could purchase several USB to IDE converters, add a USB hub, a standard PC power supply, a small PC case and have box of HDs. Sounds very similiar to your solution, except it wouldn't be RAID 5.

Looking forward to learning more.

Thanks,
Hermit

 

[erwos]

"While typing this I had an Ah-ha, I could purchase several USB to IDE converters, add a USB hub, a standard PC power supply, a small PC case and have box of HDs. Sounds very similiar to your solution, except it wouldn't be RAID 5."

It's pretty much exactly it. The question is to whether you could make Windows XP do RAID 5 in software, with no special hardware whatsoever. Someone with more knowledge than I could answer that, I think.

-Erwos

 

[21stHermit]

Originally posted by: erwos
The question is to whether you could make Windows XP do RAID 5 in software, with no special hardware whatsoever.

According to Tom's Hardware XP can do RAID 5 in software. They show 3 files that need to be modified in a hex editor. Never done this, but why not?