Raid 5 bigger then 2tb?

[marcusicp]

I am looking at this card: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816115026 and I was wondering if I will have any problems running 8 320gb HDD on it? I have read that some time there are problems with raid 5 arrays that are bigger then 2tb.

Also are there other cards that would be better for a home file server/media server with up to 6 comps playing moveis/music/etc at once? I dont want to speend big bucks but if I will see a worthwhile improvment I may spend a little more. Thanks for any help!

[Ockie]

I believe you are talking about a FAT32 limitation or you are referring to the 2TB limitation for Basic disks under NTFS?

I don't see you having any problems.

[marcusicp]

I dont know what I am talking about! I am a noob with any sort of RAID. I have been reading up on it for the last few weeks and thought I would give it a go. I plan on using NTFS if that helps. Also what are you thought on the card I have listed? Thanks.

[Dew]

I like that card, I have two of them. Both running 8x320GB arrays clocking in at 2.03TB each.

But, I run Linux with XFS as the filesystem (No partitions, just the filesystem directly on the arrays).

[unhappy_mage]

64bit LBA for over 2TB support

Yes, it supports it. If you're interested in hardware raid, the LSI LOGIC LSI00051-F (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816118055) is only $100 more. Just to mention that.

Ockie: the limitation is on 32-bit LBA addresses. The block size is 512 bytes, 2**9, so adapters that use 32 bits for LBAs can only handle 2**32 blocks. Total is 2**41, which is 2TB. The "basic NTFS" limitation is really a limit on DOS-style partitions - they only handle partitions up to 2**32 blocks. Dynamic disks use GPT which has room for 2**64 blocks, which is plenty of room for the foreseeable future.

[marcusicp]

Thanks for explaining that. With the LSI card you listed how hard will it be to find cables like that if I was to damage one? Also I assume that the LSI would be a better preformer as it is $650.00 regular price rather then $250.00 that the highpoint cost. Would I see better read and write speeds?

Also on a side note will I have any problems with watching movies from 3-4 comps at once? I will soon be doing HD-DVD/Blueray as well so that is something I need to think about aswell.

[unhappy_mage]

Thanks for explaining that. With the LSI card you listed how hard will it be to find cables like that if I was to damage one?
Not particularly hard. The 8087 is a standard form factor for SAS cables; these (http://www.rackmountpro.com/productpage.php?prodid=2679) should work fine, for example.
Also I assume that the LSI would be a better preformer as it is $650.00 regular price rather then $250.00 that the highpoint cost. Would I see better read and write speeds?
Will they be there? Most likely. Will you see them? I'm not sure. What network is in place? That's likely to be the limiting factor. Gigabit (at least up to and including the switch) is likely a better investment than the LSI, if you hadn't planned on it.
Also on a side note will I have any problems with watching movies from 3-4 comps at once? I will soon be doing HD-DVD/Blueray as well so that is something I need to think about aswell.

Blu-ray's mux rate is 54 mbit/s or less. That's less than 7 MB/s of data; 100 mbit ethernet will stream one movie but not two. DVDs are substantially lower, at a max of 10 mbit/s (1.25 MB/s), and HD-DVD is in the middle at 13 or 20 mbit/s in HD. Watching (the most demanding, Blu-ray) movies from "3-4 computers" will be fine over gigabit ethernet, but 100 megabit ethernet will definitely choke any semblance of watchability out of the film in question. HD-DVD or DVD on 100 mbit won't be a problem on either card. In any case, the data rates for movies are ludicrously low if network limitations don't prevail. Over gigabit ethernet, one gets 125 MB/s in one direction; it's not ridiculous to guess the Highpoint will get there, and I'd be awfully surprised if the LSI didn't get there. At that rate you could play twenty Blu-ray streams. Movies are not hard to deliver ;)

[i_robot73]

64bit LBA for over 2TB support

Yes, it supports it. If you're interested in hardware raid, the LSI LOGIC LSI00051-F (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816118055) is only $100 more. Just to mention that.



Actually, it's only 3 Franlkin's @ EWiz....sure, ground shipping is free. but worth the extra $$ savings IMHO :D Still piecing mine together

[marcusicp]

Blueray's mux rate is 54 mbit/s or less. That's less than 7 MB/s of data; 100 mbit ethernet will stream one movie but not two. DVDs are substantially lower, at a max of 10 mbit/s (1.25 MB/s), and HD-DVD is in the middle at 13 or 20 mbit/s in HD. Watching (the most demanding, Blu-ray) movies from "3-4 computers" will be fine over gigabit ethernet, but 100 megabit ethernet will definitely choke any semblance of watchability out of the film in question. HD-DVD or DVD on 100 mbit won't be a problem on either card. In any case, the data rates for movies are ludicrously low if network limitations don't prevail. Over gigabit ethernet, one gets 125 MB/s in one direction; it's not ridiculous to guess the Highpoint will get there, and I'd be awfully surprised if the LSI didn't get there. At that rate you could play twenty Blu-ray streams. Movies are not hard to deliver ;)

I had planned on doing gigabit. So the RAID card with 8 disc in RAID 5 wont be the bottleneck?

[marcusicp]

Actually, it's only 3 Franlkin's @ EWiz....sure, ground shipping is free. but worth the extra $$ savings IMHO :D Still piecing mine together

Thanks for the heads up! I will get it from there if I go with that card.

[Dew]

You could stream 10 Blu-ray/HD-DVD movies at the same time and as long as the server has a PCIe based Gigabit connector, it would not even sweat. My fileservers can serve up 4 simultaneous clients at a combined 900Mbits. Three at 980Mbits. When serving 20 or so, it drops to around 500Mbits. So no, you will not have any issues serving up 4 HD streams.

Oh, and considering how much the cost has fallen in recent weeks, go for 8x500GB. That nets you an extra 1.15TB for an additional cost of $200. (Comparing $110 500G drives to $85 320GB Drives)

[marcusicp]

Good news on the HD streaming. I guess I will be fine.

I already have the 320gb drives or I would have went with the 1tb when they come out just for density.

What ram and proc should I go with? Do I need anything with any kind of power or would I be fine with whatever old stuff I have around the house?

[i_robot73]

You could stream 10 Blu-ray/HD-DVD movies at the same time and as long as the server has a PCIe based Gigabit connector, it would not even sweat. My fileservers can serve up 4 simultaneous clients at a combined 900Mbits. Three at 980Mbits. When serving 20 or so, it drops to around 500Mbits. So no, you will not have any issues serving up 4 HD streams.

Oh, and considering how much the cost has fallen in recent weeks, go for 8x500GB. That nets you an extra 1.15TB for an additional cost of $200. (Comparing $110 500G drives to $85 320GB Drives)

I hadn't thought of that before....Nice ;) . 16x lane [max 8.5GB/s] for the RAID card (yeah, only 4x or 8x lane used); and a 1x for the PCI-e NIC [using the 'full' 2.5GB]....:eek:

Wonder how well the HD's WILL be able to keep up w/ a single request :D

TD has the Intel (http://biz.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=2276643&CatId=2380) model fairly decetly

[codename47]

I've got the exact card in raid 5 with 5x400GB drives and I have no issues with the card or the performance. I love the online expansion capability that most cards don't have unless you pay xxx more dollars. It hold all my data and streams up to 3-4 PCS at a time without a hitch.

You really won't be able to push the bandwidth of this card over an every day home network. It would max the network before it would max out. Even HD material at 20MB/s over 6 computers wouldn't tax the sustained rate of the array.

[mjz_5]

I hadn't thought of that before....Nice ;) . 16x lane [max 8.5GB/s] for the RAID card (yeah, only 4x or 8x lane used); and a 1x for the PCI-e NIC [using the 'full' 2.5GB]....:eek:

Wonder how well the HD's WILL be able to keep up w/ a single request :D

TD has the Intel (http://biz.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=2276643&CatId=2380) model fairly decetly

why not use the onboard pcie network card?

[unhappy_mage]

I've got the exact card in raid 5 with 5x400GB drives and I have no issues with the card or the performance. I love the online expansion capability that most cards don't have unless you pay xxx more dollars. It hold all my data and streams up to 3-4 PCS at a time without a hitch.

Which card? There are two under discussion...

Raid 5 shouldn't be the bottleneck for sequential reads with either card. Media has a much lower data rate than a single disk, and generally on decent controllers STR goes up with more drives ;)

[Madwand]

I am looking at this card: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816115026 and I was wondering if I will have any problems running 8 320gb HDD on it? I have read that some time there are problems with raid 5 arrays that are bigger then 2tb.

The card should handle it fine, but there could be an issue with the OS. Which OS are you planning to use?

2003 SP1, XP-64, Vista shouldn't have any issues, but older OSs could.

Also, you'd likely have problems if you tried to boot off the array. You should avoid this with the OS on a separate drive.

One way out with older OSs would be to create two separate arrays. Another way might be to create two partitions on the same array.

In any case, using a new OS would be a good idea because they tend to perform better.

[i_robot73]

why not use the onboard pcie network card?

Hard enough finding a decent, STABLE MB w/ all the bells/whistles on a budget :D (onboard video, GB NIC, AND PCI-e slotS for the RAID card)

In my case, it's a fileserver 1st, DC 2nd....I already have 2 'servers'; so still floating the idea of migrating my dual-PIII sys. or just using this to overhaul my whole setup :rolleyes:

Enough heat/noise/etc. w/ the HDs and CPU I didn't want to load it down. But I wanted something I could also 'move' into a diff. beast in the future.

Anyone know, ballpark, how a 1x PCI-e would fare vs. a onboard GB NIC :confused: I would ASSUME the onboard would have more chance of being a bottleneck in a full GB network :o

[codename47]

Which card? There are two under discussion...

Raid 5 shouldn't be the bottleneck for sequential reads with either card. Media has a much lower data rate than a single disk, and generally on decent controllers STR goes up with more drives ;)

Sorry the one in the original post... HighPoint RocketRAID 2320

[Dew]

Anyone know, ballpark, how a 1x PCI-e would fare vs. a onboard GB NIC :confused: I would ASSUME the onboard would have more chance of being a bottleneck in a full GB network :o

I use the nvidia onboard gigabit nics on my fileservers, as they are internally PCIe anyways.

[i_robot73]

I use the nvidia onboard gigabit nics on my fileservers, as they are internally PCIe anyways.

Don't think I'd have an issue if it was one of the nVidia onboards. Board I'll BE using has the RealTek GB :rolleyes:

But even still; an Intel PCI-e or the nVidia onboard....I'd be hard pressed NOT to use the Intel :D