File Server/NAS Setup Suggestions

S

stncttr908

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 27, 2003
Messages
227
Alright, when I get around to building a new desktop I'm also going to build a RAID 5 file server (1.5TB + parity) for my important files/future considerations. Here is what I'm proposing:

Plan #1 (Current/new parts)

This calls for a few new parts plus parts from my current system when I upgrade.

** = new part

ABIT NF7-S 2.0
Athlon XP 2500+
512MB/1GB DDR
GF2MX or other old AGP/PCI video
Gigabit Ethernet PCI**
1x500GB Seagate 7200.10 IDE
3x500GB Seagate 7200.10 IDE**
PROMISE FastTrak SX4060 PCI IDE 4-Channel Adapter** (or other card, suggestions?)
Cheap ATX case, DVD-ROM, etc.
Windows Server 2003, Linux, etc.

Plan #2

All new parts here, aside from the assorted bits

Intel 945G/GZ board w/Gigabit, Intel GMA 950, ICH7 southbridge (RAID 0/1/0+1/5) Intel Matrix RAID, etc.
Core 2 Duo E4300/E6300 (new/used)
4x500GB SATAII 16MB cache (Western Digital, Seagate, etc.)
2x512MB DDR2-800
Cheap ATX case, DVD-ROM, assorted bits
OS undetermined as of yet

Now, the questions...

1) Since the ICH7's performance is pretty solid, coupled with a C2D, would this be faster overall than a PCI card and my old CPU/mobo?
2) If it is faster, would it be worth the $200-$300 more I'd spend for option #2?
3) What is the deal with the performance dropoffs with files 256MB or larger on a RAID 5 NAS?
4) Would 1GB be enough for say Windows Server 2003 Standard?

It would be handy to use the server as a render/encoding slave if need be, so that's another plus for #2.

I would make this a poll, but there are too many variables involved such as "Well, #1 is better, but I would change..." or the like, so I figured I'd just leave it open to suggestions. Thanks for reading and any help you can provide.
 
i could basically max out a 100mbit network with a p3 650 and 384 megs ram running a PATA drive in all that 33mhz pci goodness.

with a 975/ich7r with RAID 0 i get anywhere from 25-65 mbyte/s on GigE (averaging around 40mbyte/s). that is with a sata controller and NIC riding the pcie bus - i actually think i'm maxing the drives at this point.

maybe that data helps, maybe it doesn't. a pci-only rig that was running strictly file serving probably realistically would not fall far behind that; i have not tested that theory.
 
stncttr908 said:
1) Since the ICH7's performance is pretty solid, coupled with a C2D, would this be faster overall than a PCI card and my old CPU/mobo?
2) If it is faster, would it be worth the $200-$300 more I'd spend for option #2?
3) What is the deal with the performance dropoffs with files 256MB or larger on a RAID 5 NAS?
4) Would 1GB be enough for say Windows Server 2003 Standard?
Click to expand...

1. Yes. Much. Storage + Gigabit will easily saturate standard PCI. Stay off PCI where you can. An expensive processor is not critical. ICH8R/ICH8DO are also good candidates.

2. Your money & priorities. You might be able to save more money with a tweaked build. I'd certainly go for a new build with a decent I/O design if I was building it for performance.

3. Badly designed and cheap hardware and/or testing issues. The small file size business is nonsense -- it's showing cache performance. The transition point is related to RAM / cache limits. The big file size performance is the real deal, and in some cases it's bad because the HW/SW is not so great. In other cases, I suspect that the testing is not optimized, because I see some results elsewhere for the same devices that are much better than SNB's.

But, it's probably more right than wrong to be conservative about the performance of cheap consumer NAS boxes / badly designed boxes (e.g. those with GbE and RAID on the same PCI bus, as at least one of their DIY boxes is).

4. Yes, it's certainly enough to get by. Also consider Vista -- it has some networking and file handling improvements that might give you a benefit, and it cost less.

"RAID alone is not a backup", blah blah blah -- if you're storing original data on the file server, think of how you're going to back it up so that it can survive malware / a bad delete / format / random file corruption / etc. It could be complex -- e.g. another full server, or simple, e.g. an external drive that you disconnect after a backup of critical files.
 
Thanks for the comments so far. I appreciate it. Especially @Madwand for his many insightful points.

I've shifted away from the C2D idea and am leaning towards a cheap LGA775 Celeron, possibly even the Celeron D 331, which only runs < $40 shipped on ZipZoomFly. The 945G chipsets have the GigE on the PCI-E lanes while the keeping the SATA off of it, if I understand correctly. This should eliminate the bottlenecks I would hope.



With the Celeron, 4x500GB WD SATAII drives instead of Seagate (no real preference, I like both WD and Seagate and haven't experienced failures with either) and 1GB RAM it appears I'd be spending the same as if I were to grab a PCI controller, GigE card, and three more Seagates (after selling off my remaining 500GB Seagate anyway).

I'd probably stick to Linux or Windows Server 2003 since obviously one is free and the other I can get for free through my university's MS Academic Alliance.

Also, would you recommend a separate boot drive for the OS? I've seen this done quite often with file server setups. The benefits are obvious, but would an old 20-30GB drive suffice? Or is it recommend a get a more modern drive?

Thanks for the advice/experiences, and please keep them coming.
 
stncttr908 said:
With the Celeron, 4x500GB WD SATAII drives instead of Seagate (no real preference, I like both WD and Seagate and haven't experienced failures with either) and 1GB RAM it appears I'd be spending the same as if I were to grab a PCI controller, GigE card, and three more Seagates (after selling off my remaining 500GB Seagate anyway).
Click to expand...

If you are using the drives in RAID don't get standard WD drives, they have a "feature" that makes them no good for that. (look up TLER and RE drives if you haven't heard of this yet)
 
LightningCrash said:
you might also check out OpenFiler
Click to expand...
Thanks. I've looked into systems like FreeNAS and ClarkConnect, but I'd rather have the ability to run my apps on a separate system. Thus, a full blown OS is probably the best way for me to go.

If you are using the drives in RAID don't get standard WD drives, they have a "feature" that makes them no good for that. (look up TLER and RE drives if you haven't heard of this yet)
Click to expand...
Very interesting.

http://www.wdc.com/en/library/sata/2579-001098.pdf

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I'm aware of RAID Edtion WD drives, but I probably just wrote it off as some marketing ploy. Anyone have any TLER experiences?
 
stncttr908 said:
Very interesting.

http://www.wdc.com/en/library/sata/2579-001098.pdf

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I'm aware of RAID Edtion WD drives, but I probably just wrote it off as some marketing ploy. Anyone have any TLER experiences?
Click to expand...

Not personally, but I have read many accounts of drives mysteriously dropping off of arrays only to test fine and rebuild ok just to have another one drop as bad. This is the symptom of non TLER (RE) WD drives.

Here is an example from this forum:
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1098979&highlight=tler
 
Thanks Lazn, I'll keep researching that. Do you think this would be a problem for non-WD drives?

Anyway, I've noticed that a lot of the 945G/945GZ boards are only listed as having the ICH7 south bridge, not the ICH7R. Would these still work? Does Intel's Matrix RAID require a RAID capable chipset, or is it software RAID?

Thank you.
 
stncttr908 said:
Thanks Lazn, I'll keep researching that. Do you think this would be a problem for non-WD drives?

Anyway, I've noticed that a lot of the 945G/945GZ boards are only listed as having the ICH7 south bridge, not the ICH7R. Would these still work? Does Intel's Matrix RAID require a RAID capable chipset, or is it software RAID?

Thank you.
Click to expand...

Non WD drives still talk to the RAID controller while doing an extended error recovery, so they do not need TLER. (not an issue on other brand drives)

Intel's Matrix RAID requires the "R" southbridge, whether ICH7R or ICH8R.
 
stncttr908 said:
Also, would you recommend a separate boot drive for the OS? I've seen this done quite often with file server setups. The benefits are obvious, but would an old 20-30GB drive suffice? Or is it recommend a get a more modern drive?
Click to expand...

A separate OS drive is a really good idea, and IMO worth doing even at the expense of another slot, etc., and smaller older drive. If you have a good amount of RAM, the access times and transfer rates of the OS drive probably won't matter much, so slower drives, within reason are fine.

However, this depends on the age and condition of the drive. The space is enough, but some 20 GB drives go back so far that I wouldn't trust them. You can mitigate this issue somewhat with OS image backups, but you don't really want to risk instability of the OS itself due to drive issues where you can.
 
I'll probably bring over my 200GB IDE from my current setup to use for OS/apps then, thanks. These "RAID/Enterprise" class WD drives run $159.99 each for the 500GB model, which is the same as the Seagate 7200.10 series.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top