Need to build storage server (3TB-5TB)

K

killerasp

Gawd
Joined
Jul 17, 2001
Messages
963
Right now im looking to build a storage server consisting of 3-5TB. It need to be rack mountable and about 4U. IDE or SATA but must be RAID 5. Could someone point me in the right direction to what i need? I wouldnt mind building it, i just dont know if there is vendor that offers all of this in a complete package.
 
There was a really good 4U case in one of the threads in this forum earlier. I forgot what it was called, but it was like 10 pages or so. It had 15 bays and 3 power supplies or something..

12-port 3Ware SATA card (9000-series)
12 400GB Seagate 7200.8 drives (10 data, 1 parity, 1 hot spare)
mobo, proc, ram as you need it (depends on if this is just for backup/storage or if its for a heavily used server - since the 3ware card does the XOR calcs you can skimp on the proc).

so thats 4TB or so.

Or you can buy a SAN or NAS from Dell that holds 3TB for $15,000.

What OS are you going to run?
 
Here you go

get a server and just add this

5.6 TB for 13,000 , pretty cheap

Apple Xserve Raid

Get the fiber channel card from them and plug it in and play.

We are using 2 of these for backups and have 1.7 TB each, connected to compaq ML370's and veritas

Sweet stuff,
 
I am running a Promise RM8000, 2TB total RAID5, and I am happy with it.
You could get a Promise RM15000, or you could buy an enclosure from pretty much anyone, Caen Engineering comes to mind, or RAID Inc., they all work just fine.
 
:)
I have an IDE "raidzone" setup sitting in my office collecting dust, dual p3 10-12 IDE drives (swap style) out the front. one internal drive for an o/s. i will sell it cheap.. add 10 seagate 400gb units & you are good to go..

honestly i wouldnt use the IDE or SATA for anything important, just my opinion ;)

eMail me if your interested in unit, its rack or standalone setup, i can send pictures.
 
thanks guys...ill be looking into this.

we already use a 3rd party to handle cricital backups so this server will just be used to back up IIS logs that we use for analysis.

Why wouldnt you recommend IDE/SATA for this purpose? SCSI's are great but $$$$$$. Is the life span on a high end SCSI drive that much better than a IDE/SATA drive?
 
after reading a bit of that article about SATA problems regarding shielding and such...using a SATA RAID system is making me very very cautious about setting up a SATA system....any opinions?
 
here is a plan...

If you got a alot of room like in your server area
Get like 3-5 of these with some 200GB harddrives to 400GB hardrive would be like 2,000 to 4,000 alot less that 13-15g's. May not be as fast as serial or SCSI but if you threw in some raptors or somthing in one for most used files you would be set :)

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=70819&item=5149896939&rd=1

And no i'm not selling it...just was seeing what ebay was up too...and ran across this
 
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Suggesting a USB2 enclosure is imho bad advice.

The USB interface is simply too narrow and slow to handle large simultanious data sreams.

As far as SATA goes, the whole cable shielding issue, such as it is, doesn't really matter all that much when you use a multibay enclosure because there is a backpanel that doesn't actually have any SATA cables associated with it.

SCSI vs ATA
No idea where the notion of "if it is SCSI it is safer than SATA" comes from, perhaps from that many SATA multiay users purchase consumer grade hard drives. Be that as it may, you always have to think about application and feasibility.

Of course we would all rather run multi TB solid storage arrays, but would we actually utilize them well enough to justify the expense?

Non-SCSI arrays are well suited for most all small to medium size applications, the SCSI crowd doesn't like that, but it's reality nonetheless.
 
our other moderator UICompEO2
works at LSI Logic, developing the next gen of SAS
specifically he tortures HDDs in heavy access RAID arrays
which as you mentioned isnt "typical"
however the failure rate of the initial couple of gens of SATA drives was alarmingly anomalous
for a class that aspires to enterprise status

I too would recommend SCSI if its critical
you have to weight the replacement and maintence culture
throw more ATA drives in regularly or fewer SCSI
there are alot of variables

another factor indirectly raised is signal quality
cheaper and cobbled together RAID appliances
often lack full testing of their signal quality, especially when you factor in hotswap caddies
a terminated signal is far superior in that case
which aint ATA

a well tested SATA array from a reputable manufacturer however should be fine
for a medium to light pattern
the protocol is fairly robust, but actual implementation can be less than desired
 
you could also pick up some FC on the cheap.
Look on eb'ay for an MTI (12bay direct FC intergace) enclosure.
They've been selling between $50-300 lately.
Find some cheap 10k 18/36 gb drives, it's notTB, but it's cheap and fast.
You can find 146GB drives, but they are scarce and much more expensive than the 18/36's.
FC card should be under $100
 
extreme raid 3000
less than $300 on ebay
I currently have three MTI's running on a fibre switch with the ER3k as the controller doing hardware raid, yes, i've spent a boatload on 73/146gb FC drives and teh controller and arrays, but you can setup an FC array very cheap friom ebay, except for the cabling, sometimes that can be a bit costly..
Just opinion from my experience
EDIT: found this on ebay.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5150837439
u3 upgradable array with trays, i've dealt with him before. Nice guy, Alan Horton is the guys name.
 
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
http://www.raidking.com/

We use the SCSI/SATA Raid cage, model 827R, loaded up with 4TB of SATA drives (16x250MB).

http://www.raidking.com/rk827.htm

Running it in a RAID 50 array with 2 spares. gives us about 2.8TB of usable space. Different Configs are available via the on-board OS. So far the support has been very responsive (one bad drive). The system that accesses it is a HIGH volume Oracle DB supporting 100 or so concurrent users (Hospital PACS system)

The whole thing was less than $14,000 !

Brent
 
Give this case a try:

http://www.supermicro.com/products/chassis/3U/933/SC933T-R760.cfm

(15 - 1)*400 = 5.6TB storage max

I would recommend going with 2 hot swap spares which will give you 4.8TB of storage. Then just build a basic server platform with the proper SATA RAID controllers that others have listed in this thread. The hardware construction is fairly basic, but the software configuration will get much more tricky. Don't use Windows.
 
If you want cheap but not the best Raid 5 Write speeds go with promise. If you want to spend alittle more and get very good Raid 5 Write speeds go with RaidInc's Falcon boxes or there Raven if you want iScsi.

I say stick with SATA, you can get about the same Disk I/O as a SCSI drives if you get a good Raid 5 card. i.e. RaidInc not Promise.
 
killerasp said:
after reading a bit of that article about SATA problems regarding shielding and such...using a SATA RAID system is making me very very cautious about setting up a SATA system....any opinions?
Click to expand...

I think SATA is better than ATA for you because SATA is built with hotswap in mind.

You have plenty of choices here .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top