• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

A cheap file server.

M

mpeg4v3

Gawd
Joined
Sep 14, 2001
Messages
644
Basically, in the future, I want to make a cheap file server for my small dorm room PC network (for a dorm room, it's pretty impressive). Here's the equipment relevant to this that I have available:

2x WD 40gb 7200rpm 2mb drives (in Raid0 already) PATA
1x WD 80gb 7200rpm 8mb drive PATA
1x Quantum 60gb 7200rpm 2mb drive PATA

IT7 motherboard with onboard HPT374 chipset- supporting RAID5.

Now, I don't want to spend too much money on this. Basically, the IT7, although having RAID5 support, can't be used, as it's my main desktop motherboard, and I don't want to run this out of my desktop. I want to be able to stick it in a corner with everything shared and not have to worry about it.
It's my understanding that basically with RAID5, you take however many hard drives you have running in it, and subtract the size of one of the drives, to get the size of the complete array, right?

I figure I have the following options:
1.) Get two more 40gb drives and have a small (120gb), but very cheap ($50/drive, plus $90 PCI controller- $190) file server.
2.) The same as above, but instead get two more 80gb drives and have a faster (8mb cache) setup for about $40 more ($230), adding up to 160gb.
3.) Go all out and attempt to get 3x Seagate SATA 8mb 120gb drives plus an SATA controller ($110/drive + RocketRaid 1540 (this a good card?) for $75 - $405) for a total of 240gb.

Now, my question is, which do you think is the most bang for my buck? I'm trying to approach this is both a cost-effective but future-wise manner. Although I may not have the stuff to fill up a 240gb array *right now*, I may in the future. However, I still may have plenty of space with a 160gb array for quite a while longer, plus I have a DVD burner.

Basically, what I'm asking is, if you were in my situation, what would you guys do?

EDIT:
I just realized the fact that "cheap" and "file server" is a bit of an oxymoron, but alas.

EDIT #2:
I also just thought of option #4:
4.) The slow-but-steady approach. Get the SATA controller, then get a Seagate 200gb 7200rpm 8mb cache drive. As time progresses, slowly add addition drives to the fray. The cons of this are, of course, the fact it's not in a RAID array so disk failure means everything is gone, each time I add a hard drive after the second I'll have to backup EVERYTHING to the limited space I have to recreate the array, and it'll take a long time to even get close to 3 drives.
 
i think i'd try to sell off the smaller drives for a few bucks if you can get anything for them and shoot for something around 120gig hds or larger - right now they are fairly cheap (can be found for about 85$ or less on deals) and the 8mb cache speeds things up alot. The only drawback here is that if you do raid with redundancy, you will lose 120 gigs to it

but that's just my 2 cents
 
Originally posted by mpeg4v3

IT7 motherboard with onboard HPT374 chipset- supporting RAID5.
Click to expand...
this is the second time Ive heard that the HPT374 supports RAID5
but according to this it doesnt, even if it does if its onboard it would be employing the CPU as the XOR engine :rolleyes:
RAID chapter I: The Lesser Levels

It's my understanding that basically with RAID5, you take however many hard drives you have running in it, and subtract the size of one of the drives, to get the size of the complete array, right?
Click to expand...
correct, efficiency increases with the stripe width
(number of drives)

Personally Id go the SATA route, because that RAID controller will give you more reliable service for a longer amount of time,
SATA and the 7 Deadly Sins of Parallel ATA
ATA Not So Frequently Asked Questions
and while it maybe overkill for this particular application, it provides you with a very bright upgrade path

however the 1540 also doesnt support RAID 5
and your limited to 4 channels

Personally Id get something with a dedicated XOR processor
(and did, in PATA 2 years ago the Promise XS6000 w\ 128MB cache)

so now we are blowing out the top end of your budget :rolleyes:
so option #1 maybe

when you say file server, how big is the LAN and what are you serving up?
 
Cheap, expandable file server:
--Used PII + mobo (bought cheap)
--Cheap bookshelf modded as a case (not as if I'd be taking it to LAN parties)
--Leftover PSUs (some too flimsy to trust at the power level claimed)
--6 channel ATA hardware RAID 0/1/3/5 card (bought cheap, now out of stock)
--Leftover memory, graphics card, NIC(s) and ATA cards
--Piles of leftover harddrives (pulled from OEM machines that I upgraded, or bought when an insanely good deal after coupon and/or rebate).
--Linux

If I ever get around to assembling it, it'll be pretty nice... As it is, I've already got over a TB's worth of harddrives sitting around with no home... Only trouble is, I've got all manner of computer projects going on and not enough time... If I finished everything, I'd have 10 computers with a total of: >12GHz CPU; >7GB RAM; >1.75TB harddrive... and I already gave a computer away a couple of weeks back...

The sad thing is, given my current usage patterns (as opposed to intended), I can't really justify having more than 2: one as TV + VCR/developement/email/internet and one for gaming/alternate TV + VCR. And that's assuming that TV and gaming are justifiable :p
 
Hmm, that's odd, I could have sworn the 1540 supported RAID5. Maybe it was the 1640 I was thinking of.

Anyway, yes, I know, offloading the RAID5 instructions to CPU is a baaaad thing. The thing is though, I don't have $150 or so to spend on a dedicated RAID card, or if I did, I wouldn't actually be able to use anything on it for a while. On top of that, I don't have any spare sticks of PC133 ram- so that's more money to spend. And on top of all of that, if I were to go this route, I'd want to get a card that supported SATA so that it's future-proof, since a lot of drives are switching over to SATA right now. Plus I can't seem to find a 4x SATA card that is hardware (All of the highpoint/promise ones are software RAID5, no?).

Also, performance isn't my main concern. It would be nice, yes, to have a blazing fast 4 drive RAID array running off a 64bit Supertrak with a 512mb stick on it, but I don't have that money. All I really want is something that can store the files and be fast enough to play them back over the network (MP3/Video wise). Granted, a bit more performance would be better (thats why I'm thinking of going with option #2 and the 8mb cache drives...), but not if it's incredibly expensive.

Well anyway, in your opinion, what would be the best 4-channel RAID5 PATA controller for around $100? And what type of CPU power do you think I would need to have a 3-4 drive RAID5 array using software?

Also, to answer your other question, right now the LAN is in it's infancy at just four computers (three desktops and a laptop). However, I am slowly getting the parts together to get a few more up and running. By the end, I estimate about 6-7 computers (which should be pretty impressive for a dorm room). I plan to serve out MP3 and Video- it would be nice to have all of my MP3s on a centralized server that doesn't rely on when this computer (my main desktop) is on or off.

Edit:
Of course, I could always just say "Screw RAID" and setup a file server based solely on JBOD. No redundacy, but extremely cheap and would do what I want. Only problems I would have is if a drive failed- data is gone forever.
 
have you considered doing a Linux software RAID5?
with a simple PCI IDE card?

from what I hear its much more effecient
and with the money you save you could buy a new dual layer DVD burner :p

I guess it boils down to the CPU cycles you can afford to spare
I think at this stage #1 or #2 is probably your best bet

My primary focus however has been on highend cards
(workstation use) so I dont have any firsthand recommendations or collected benchmarks in the $100 range

you know, for just a little bit more (of your total budget)
your right there at the median price of older external SCSI RAID arrays on ebay (retired corporate) the disadvantage is of course increased electrical use and heat (unless you need to keep that room heated next winter :p
 
Hmm, that's a pretty good idea, Linux software RAID5 at least. What I've got at my disposal right now is a Soyo P4S Dragon Ultra (with a monsterous 2.0ghz celeron that may be dead anyway at it's helm and no ram, hehe, hopefully all soon to be remedied) that has two normal ata100 ports + two HPT371 (or 370, hell I can't remember anymore on that old thing) ports. That should be enough to run a 3-disk RAID array along with a 4th disk for OS. The only problem is I still don't consider myself knowledgable enough in Linux to make one, but at least it would be a learning experience.

I think I'm for sure going to go with part of option #2 at least- get two more 80gb drives. They're cheap ($70/drive off newegg while 40gb drives are $50/drive- that just does not make sense to me) and they've got the 8mb cache. Besides, in the far off future I could always get another two 40gb drives off ebay or some such and have a four drive RAID0 array for video capture. That would be pretty fast.

I'm kind of leaning towards the "wait for monsterous rebate" deals though. I could only afford about two drives right off the bat, but after (three or so months) I could get my rebates back and get a third drive.

Gah, having a low budget sucks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top