Want to build my own file server... help me...

[sandiegoislandboy]

I want to build a 1+TB home file server with a RAID 5 configuration but I have a few questions before i get started...

1. What is the key component for a file server: the cpu or RAM? Otherwards, should I spend more money into the CPU or RAM?

2. I have either read somewhere or someone told me, the only to accomplish a RAID 5 setup is by using Windows Server rather than Windows XP Pro, true or false?

3. Given I am willing to spend $1250 on the hardware with about half of the budget going to the hard drives, what CPU/MB/RAM and possible video combo would you recommend for about $600, more or less?

4. Software RAID or Hardware RAID... advantages/disadvantages?

Thanks.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: islandtech
I want to build a 1+TB home file server with a RAID 5 configuration but I have a few questions before i get started...

1. What is the key component for a file server: the cpu or RAM? Otherwards, should I spend more money into the CPU or RAM?

2. I have either read somewhere or someone told me, the only to accomplish a RAID 5 setup is by using Windows Server rather than Windows XP Pro, true or false?

3. Given I am willing to spend $1250 on the hardware with about half of the budget going to the hard drives, what CPU/MB/RAM and possible video combo would you recommend for about $600, more or less?

4. Software RAID or Hardware RAID... advantages/disadvantages?

Thanks.

1. The network it's connected to. Unless you're on gigabit, your bottleneck will be your network.

2. False. RAID5 can be done with Linux/BSD, or in hardware via a new controller.

3. Video is irrelevant for a file server - any motherboard with integrated video will suffice. RAM is more important than CPU - at least 512MB for a Linux/BSD setup, but it's so cheap that 1GB isn't out of the question given the budget. For motherboard and CPU, I'd suggest one of the newer Intel or nForce solutions, just for the reason that they sport a half-dozen SATA ports and RAID in hardware. Either way, your CPU/RAM/MBD should not be costing anywhere near $600 for a fileserver.

4. Software RAID requires more CPU overhead, but is "free." Hardware RAID generally comes "free" on newer motherboards.

Edit - Welcome to the forums

- M4H

 

[zodder]

Hope this helps:

1. RAM and hard drive speed (read/write) will be the most important thing

2. False. Your RAID card/chipset will be the determining factor in RAID setup. XP will limit the amount of concurrent connections you can have (5, I think?), where a server OS will be unlimited, as long as you have CALs

3. Depends upon what your file server will be doing. A repository for shared files? Go cheap on cpu and video. Video streaming or connecting to a TV? Video card options/outputs become more important

4. The ability to hot-swap hard drives in case of failure

 

[ShellGuy]

here is my first question, what type of files is this hosting? DVDs or what? I would say hardware raid for the speed.

Will G.

 

[sandiegoislandboy]

I was thinking of having a 'hot-swappable' setup... so a case like the Thermaltake Armor or something similar so I can put all hd racks in the front.

The files I would be having on the file server will primarily be digital camera photos since my wife is an avid photographer. Also of course there will be music, video clips, and various backup copies of software and movies.

At the moment I do not plan on having streaming media but I would like to keep that option open.

As far as a network, I plan to have the file server hooked up via hard wire. I plan on building a media box in which that will be wireless. All the other computers will be connected via hard wire.

Currently I have a single hard drive in my main desktop computer that I made it 'shared' but I want to move all data onto the file server.

I have two systems laying around, a P3 1.0GHz and an AMD XP 1600+ both utilizing PC133 SDRAM. The P3 1.0GHz has 512MB and the AMD XP 1600+ has 756MB. If I was to purchase a PCI SATA RAID card, would any of those systems be sufficient? Or if it came down to it, I also have an AMD XP 2500+ with 1GB DDR400 (the wifes system) if the P3 or XP1600+ isnt feasible.

What motherboards (Intel or AMD) offer RAID 5?

Sorry for the randomness, I just want to be able to build my own RAID 5 File Server... add it to my DIY/BYO list. =)

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: islandtech
I was thinking of having a 'hot-swappable' setup... so a case like the Thermaltake Armor or something similar so I can put all hd racks in the front.

The files I would be having on the file server will primarily be digital camera photos since my wife is an avid photographer. Also of course there will be music, video clips, and various backup copies of software and movies.

At the moment I do not plan on having streaming media but I would like to keep that option open.

As far as a network, I plan to have the file server hooked up via hard wire. I plan on building a media box in which that will be wireless. All the other computers will be connected via hard wire.

Currently I have a single hard drive in my main desktop computer that I made it 'shared' but I want to move all data onto the file server.

I have two systems laying around, a P3 1.0GHz and an AMD XP 1600+ both utilizing PC133 SDRAM. The P3 1.0GHz has 512MB and the AMD XP 1600+ has 756MB. If I was to purchase a PCI SATA RAID card, would any of those systems be sufficient? Or if it came down to it, I also have an AMD XP 2500+ with 1GB DDR400 (the wifes system) if the P3 or XP1600+ isnt feasible.

What motherboards (Intel or AMD) offer RAID 5?

Sorry for the randomness, I just want to be able to build my own RAID 5 File Server... add it to my DIY/BYO list. =)

Okay, reading over that post again, a few random thoughts of my own.

Judging by the fact that you haven't mentioned gigabit, I'm going to assume you're on 100Mbit. In this case, you don't need anything special.

Streaming media isn't anything special, unless you plan on doing transcoding on the fly. Any file store can do it.

Either of the two systems you mentioned will be able to handle file serving duties just fine with a good PCI SATA card. I'd go with the P3, based on lower power consumption/heat output, and the fact that you could use the XP1600+ as the video playback unit.

You may have to pony up some serious cash for a single-card solution with >4 ports if you intend to use hardware RAID 5. There may be some PCI RAID cards that are "smart" enough to recognize the presence of another card in the system, and would let you create a RAID array across two cards. However, the fact that you can use existing hardware as a "base build" lets you stretch the budget a bit in this sense.

If you plan on running an open OS (Linux/BSD) make sure you consider than when looking at your hardware, and make sure that the card is fully supported.

As far as hard drives, 320GB seems to be the sweet spot for deals right now. Buy five drives - three data, one parity, and one as a hot-spare that you can use if one fails. Presto, 960GB (almost a TB) of storage.

And if you have to get that magical TB, hang another 80GB off the back as a manual backup.

- M4H

 

[sandiegoislandboy]

You are correct, I am only running a 100Mbit network.

You read my mind as far as what I initially had planned to do with the P3 and XP1600+ systems.

The P3 I planned on making a file server while the XP1600+ would be my media player.

The P3 has a 1.0GHz cpu, 512MB PC133, 20GB IDE HD, and onboard video/audio. There is no RAID feature so a PCI SATA RAID card would come into play.

The AMD has the XP1600+ cpu, 786MB PC133, 40GB IDE HD, 128MB ATI Radeon 9100 and onboard audio. The video card has DVI so it allows me to hook up the computer to my television. Of course I will install a wireless 54G PCI card to allow music/movies to be played.

As for the operating sytem, I was looking into various Linux-based operating systems but do not know too much about it. I plan on installing openSuse10.2 onto another P3 machine so I can play with that. The main concern with Linux is how easy is it to setup the network/file sharing. More than likely I will have Windows XP Pro SP2 installed.

Hard drives, I was looking at the Seagate 320GB SATA hard drives, about $95 on Newegg.com. 4 for the data, 1 for parity, and another for spare in case of drive failure.

Didnt think about how much a PCI SATA RAID card would be to handle 5 SATA drives.

Do you think it is wiser to spend money on a decent CPU/MB/RAM set rather than a PCI SATA RAID card? I know a GB of memory is roughly $100, a newer/decent cpu (P4 820 or even AM2 3500+) for about $100, but then I would need to find a motherboard supporting RAID 5 from the board.

Thanks for all the feedback, esp. M4H, it is very appreciated!

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Here's what I think you should do on the server side of things. Keep in mind though, I'm a bit more biased on the "price" side of the price-to-performance ratio.

Use the P3 combo and run FreeNAS on it. It's stupidly easy to use, and assuming the P3 can boot from USB, just leave a 32MB thumbdrive sticking out the back of it, and put 4x 320GB drives in it. Unless you really need that over-a-terabyte cachet, you can get away with a standard four-port SATA card and use a 3+1 RAID set for 960GB.

(Edit - If the P3 can't boot from USB, leave the 20GB drive in there and use the installer to split it into a 50MB partition for FreeNAS itself, and the rest of the 19.9GB for non-RAID temporary storage.)

Buy something like a Promise TX4 - it's not the cheapest card, but it's a good one - and hang the four drives off that. It's not a RAID card, but FreeNAS will let you create a software RAID volume.

For a home file-server, I wouldn't sweat the hot-swap capability. If one goes down, you'll be right there and able to swap the drive quickly enough that your downtime should be in the five-minute range. Plus, you'd need a new PSU with 4 SATA power ports to support it, and the OS support.

So instead of that initial $1250 budget, you're now looking at the RAID card, four drives, and a bit of cabling - around $500 once you factor in shipping and taxes. Quite a substantial savings.

- M4H

 

[hellokeith]

Just get a ReadyNAS NV+: http://www.infrant.com/products/products_details.php?name=ReadyNAS%20NVPlus

 

[sandiegoislandboy]

I just checked the P3 system and found out that it can NOT boot from USB. I was going to ask what are my other options but as I was refreshing the post, I saw you edited your reply and added what to do in case the P3 cant boot from USB. You are good!

You mentioned partitioning the hard drive into a 50MB and 19.9GB. So I would put FreeNAS onto a CD and install it onto the 50MB partition and make it the primary, correct?

With FreeNAS would I still need an OS? Currently I am downloading Mandriva One and openSUSE10.2, I also have Windows XP Pro SP2 and Windows 2000 Pro. If I need an OS in addition to FreeNAS, which would you recommend?

I have a basic case and a 450W PSU with SATA power connectors, so I am good on that end.

In regards to the PCI SATA card, I found the Promise TX4 on Newegg.com for $60. There is also a TX4310 that supports RAID from the card. Also, theres cards with built on cache memory. I am assuming that each step up offers better peformance.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: islandtech
I just checked the P3 system and found out that it can NOT boot from USB. I was going to ask what are my other options but as I was refreshing the post, I saw you edited your reply and added what to do in case the P3 cant boot from USB. You are good!

Thanks. A little lagged on this response, but here we go:

You mentioned partitioning the hard drive into a 50MB and 19.9GB. So I would put FreeNAS onto a CD and install it onto the 50MB partition and make it the primary, correct?
Don't partition it at all - let the FreeNAS setup program do that when you boot off the CD. It will need to create the FreeNAS partition as a UFS filesystem.

With FreeNAS would I still need an OS? Currently I am downloading Mandriva One and openSUSE10.2, I also have Windows XP Pro SP2 and Windows 2000 Pro. If I need an OS in addition to FreeNAS, which would you recommend?
No, FreeNAS is its own OS based off FreeBSD, designed to do one thing and one thing only - serve files.

I have a basic case and a 450W PSU with SATA power connectors, so I am good on that end.
Cool - just make sure that if you plan to get drive bays, that they also support hot-swap.

In regards to the PCI SATA card, I found the Promise TX4 on Newegg.com for $60. There is also a TX4310 that supports RAID from the card. Also, theres cards with built on cache memory. I am assuming that each step up offers better peformance.
If you're willing to pony up the extra coin, the TX4310 will give you the extra abstraction layer between the drives and the OS - that way you won't have to worry about having the OS handle an array reconstruction, etc. As far as the performance aspect goes - you're still trapped by 100Mbit ethernet on the wire, and 54g on wireless; unless you plan on going to gigabit (and using it!) software RAID will offer more than enough throughput.

- M4H

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I'm going to post another question [topic] after my remark here, loosely related to this issue, and look forward to contributing remarks.

I have a 750Mhz P3-CPU, 768 MB of DRAM, and a Highpoint four-port IDE (ATA-133) RAID controller running three Hitachi ATA-133 160GB hard disks in RAID5. The server sits in a household gigabit LAN.

Although there was no rigorous benchmark testing, I'll "go to the mat" and insist that I can notice the improved network access over 100 Mbit Ethernet. The data on the server just seems to be "right there." But the difference -- for purpose of storing either video or photo images -- is probably insignificant for most purposes, even as the cost of a Gigabit switch and few gigabit NICs are insignificant.

Now the question I want to ask in a minute -- it's about "bottlenecks: PCI-X versus PCI-E."

 

[MerlinRML]

Originally posted by: BonzaiDuck
Now the question I want to ask in a minute -- it's about "bottlenecks: PCI-X versus PCI-E."

For most home use, PCI is plenty, PCI-X is more than enough, and PCI-E (depending on the connection) can be rediculously overkill. You get 1.06 GB/sec (bytes not bits) on a 133Mhz PCI-X bus. Things to watch out for are the fact that multiple slots can share the same bus, and all devices will down throttle to the slowest device on the bus. PCI-X is also not a full-duplex communication.

PCI-E is 250MB/sec (again, bytes not bits) per lane. So a 4x PCI-E slot would be roughly equivalent to a PCI-X slot (250MBx4=1.0GB/sec). Things to watch out for are that your slot may be an 8x slot but only connected to 4x lanes electrically and your card can only run as fast as its interface is (plugging a 4x card into an 8x slot will still only run at 4x). PCI-E has dedicated bandwidth per slot instead of a shared bus. It's also full-duplex.

When you consider that an individual hard drive is hard pressed to sustain more than 60MB/sec for very long, your hard drive is going to be your bottleneck. With multiple hard drives running in a RAID 0 array, you could definitely see some good speeds and RAID 0 scales fairly linearly. However, at that point, your gigabit network that can only handle 125MB/sec maximum is going to be your bottleneck.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Merlin, ma man!! Thanks! I never ceased to be impressed by the people I find here.

I posted the question in a "new topic," but you answered it in this one. The other post explains more.

For a file server, the other (P3) rig I mentioned -- is more than enough. The PCI-X versus PCI-E question spotlights a plan to build a Core-2-Duo workstation -- good enough for gaming, great for benchmarks, high on reliability and general speed up and down the "storage pyramid."

Your answers here have tied up some loose ends for me. Now I only need to find the money, or worry less that the money I have won't be needed for an SUV engine overhaul . . . . next year sometime. . . . after the thrill wears off

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: BonzaiDuck
Merlin, ma man!! Thanks! I never ceased to be impressed by the people I find here.

I posted the question in a "new topic," but you answered it in this one. The other post explains more.

For a file server, the other (P3) rig I mentioned -- is more than enough. The PCI-X versus PCI-E question spotlights a plan to build a Core-2-Duo workstation -- good enough for gaming, great for benchmarks, high on reliability and general speed up and down the "storage pyramid."

Your answers here have tied up some loose ends for me. Now I only need to find the money, or worry less that the money I have won't be needed for an SUV engine overhaul . . . . next year sometime. . . . after the thrill wears off

Finding anything other than a true "workstation" motherboard with PCI-X slots will probably prove problematic. Most new C2D boards will have onboard gigabit on a few PCIe lanes as well.

Off-topic - Ah, so it's a "good" engine overhaul, the kind where you take what's perfectly good and make it better. SUV in question?

- M4H

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Okay, a rather annoying showstopper - the listed controller card (Promise SATA300 TX4) isn't on the FreeBSD HCL.

I've found some mixed reports about people using it, but the words "panic" and "timeout" are showing up far too frequently.

- M4H

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Mercenary --

I'm retired, need/want a heavy-iron SUV for the occasional backpacking trip or 4-wheelin' in wildlife-refuges where it's permitted. The "unit in question" is a '95 Trooper LS with SOHC V-6. [With ambivalent affection, nicknamed "The Pooper" by mechanics.] The engine currently has about 140K miles on it, and the tranny was replaced in '04.

I thought I heard a noise that sounded like a sticking valve-lifter, but I think it's a bearing on a pulley-wheel, instead -- possibly the radiator-fan assembly. I'm just trying to hedge my bets, since I've never been inclined to buy a "new car," and I'll try and squeeze another ten years out of this sucker. [There are also insurance and tax advantages to "buying used." ] Doesn't use any oil; the last smog-inspection provoked the smog-station-tech's remark that the "emissions were lower than the 2003 Izuzu Troopers."

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: BonzaiDuck
Mercenary --

I'm retired, need/want a heavy-iron SUV for the occasional backpacking trip or 4-wheelin' in wildlife-refuges where it's permitted. The "unit in question" is a '95 Trooper LS with SOHC V-6. [With ambivalent affection, nicknamed "The Pooper" by mechanics.] The engine currently has about 140K miles on it, and the tranny was replaced in '04.

I thought I heard a noise that sounded like a sticking valve-lifter, but I think it's a bearing on a pulley-wheel, instead -- possibly the radiator-fan assembly. I'm just trying to hedge my bets, since I've never been inclined to buy a "new car," and I'll try and squeeze another ten years out of this sucker. [There are also insurance and tax advantages to "buying used." ] Doesn't use any oil; the last smog-inspection provoked the smog-station-tech's remark that the "emissions were lower than the 2003 Izuzu Troopers."

Oh ... when I saw "after the thrill wears off" I figured you were doing something like strapping a blower on.

- M4H

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Ha! No! I meant "after the thrill of the CORE-2-DUO wore off!" [LOL!!]

My "other life" career was on the East Coast, and I'm holding a rental property back there. Last year, I had to make several thousand worth of repairs, and delays caused by the insurance adjustor's schedule -- complicated further by my property-manager's inattention to getting another tenant -- cost me around $6K in rental proceeds. So in the aftermath, I've been a lot more careful about how I manage my savings -- deferring the C2D project (which is going to be a lot more expensive than just buying a $1,000 Dell-box.)

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: islandtech
Do you think it is wiser to spend money on a decent CPU/MB/RAM set rather than a PCI SATA RAID card? I know a GB of memory is roughly $100, a newer/decent cpu (P4 820 or even AM2 3500+) for about $100, but then I would need to find a motherboard supporting RAID 5 from the board.

It's a bit early to be sure, but I'd suggest considering:

1. Upgrading to gigabit.
2. Making a new on-board only or mostly on-board build.
3. Using Vista for the OS.

Regardless, I also recommend:

0. Building something to back up at least your file server's critical data. Don't count on any RAID setup to do that. And having a full backup will make RAID maintenance easier.

You might want to start with this, and convert one of your existing machines to a large backup server. No need to get fancy with performance or configuration. Spanning a few large HD could be fine. I'd still suggest gigabit.