![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
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.
unRAID
- Thread starter iRpilot
- Start date
Yep, I've been using unRaid for about 3.5 years and am very happy with it. unRaid, like most other NAS-like solutions has it proponents and detractors. Before the FlexRaid, or WHS, or Drobo, or Raid4/5/6/10 fanboys chime in and especially before the "softare raid crowd is crap shows up", here's my two cents.
I did a lot of homework before deciding on what I wanted out of a NAS-like device. I am not aware of a single NAS solution that is the "best". Figure out what you need functionality-wise first, then start comparing the solutions to see what fits you and your needs best.
I mean really really give this a lot of thought, prioritize a list of NAS features, such as write speed, disk space efficiency, hardware independence, real-time protection, multi-purpose usage, non-proprietary file format, price, ease of expansion, how much of the data are you willing to lose on your NAS due to controller or HD or motherboard failure, is the NAS data backed up somewhere else, or will the NAS be the sole home for some of the data, etc.
For home use, I think traditional Raid4/5/6/10 is a rare fit for most folks, and I think hardware Raid (as in expensive controllers that cost more than hard drives) is also overkill for most home uses. If someone's "thing" is to have a $800 Raid5 card that gives them killer write speeds on a benchmark, all the power to 'em. For most home uses, (off the top of my head) I think unRaid, WHS, and FlexRaid are the ones worth consideration.
For cost, make sure you really analyze total cost - a lot of folks will spend $$$ on hardware (controller cards, server motherboards, etc), but hate the though of spending $ for a software license for the NAS.
For me, I went with unRaid because 1) I was able to try it out without spending a penny - the 3 disk version is free and I experimented with an existing PC and hard drives and had it available on my network in under 20 minutes total, including time to download and install unRaid on a flash drive, 2) Ease of expansion - it works with a mish-mash of hard drives, you can mix sizes and types (ide or sata), 3) drive efficiency - one drive is for parity, the rest is for data 4) No real specific hardware - as long as the motherboard will boot off a flash drive, you're good, 5) non-proprietary file format, 6) if multiple drives fail simultaneously, you only lose the data on those drives, you have to lose all drives to lose all your data 6) write speed was not important to me.
As I mentioned before, figure out your needs as unRaid my or may not be your best fit.
I did a lot of homework before deciding on what I wanted out of a NAS-like device. I am not aware of a single NAS solution that is the "best". Figure out what you need functionality-wise first, then start comparing the solutions to see what fits you and your needs best.
I mean really really give this a lot of thought, prioritize a list of NAS features, such as write speed, disk space efficiency, hardware independence, real-time protection, multi-purpose usage, non-proprietary file format, price, ease of expansion, how much of the data are you willing to lose on your NAS due to controller or HD or motherboard failure, is the NAS data backed up somewhere else, or will the NAS be the sole home for some of the data, etc.
For home use, I think traditional Raid4/5/6/10 is a rare fit for most folks, and I think hardware Raid (as in expensive controllers that cost more than hard drives) is also overkill for most home uses. If someone's "thing" is to have a $800 Raid5 card that gives them killer write speeds on a benchmark, all the power to 'em. For most home uses, (off the top of my head) I think unRaid, WHS, and FlexRaid are the ones worth consideration.
For cost, make sure you really analyze total cost - a lot of folks will spend $$$ on hardware (controller cards, server motherboards, etc), but hate the though of spending $ for a software license for the NAS.
For me, I went with unRaid because 1) I was able to try it out without spending a penny - the 3 disk version is free and I experimented with an existing PC and hard drives and had it available on my network in under 20 minutes total, including time to download and install unRaid on a flash drive, 2) Ease of expansion - it works with a mish-mash of hard drives, you can mix sizes and types (ide or sata), 3) drive efficiency - one drive is for parity, the rest is for data 4) No real specific hardware - as long as the motherboard will boot off a flash drive, you're good, 5) non-proprietary file format, 6) if multiple drives fail simultaneously, you only lose the data on those drives, you have to lose all drives to lose all your data 6) write speed was not important to me.
As I mentioned before, figure out your needs as unRaid my or may not be your best fit.
dangbrandon
Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2010
- Messages
- 697
software > hardware
great explanation JRS i learned something new.
i would totally recommend liability > read & write speeds cause real lifetime difference you wouldn't know.unless you have a crapload stacks of SSD's
great explanation JRS i learned something new.
i would totally recommend liability > read & write speeds cause real lifetime difference you wouldn't know.unless you have a crapload stacks of SSD's
Thanks JRS, good to hear someone has had long-term firsthand experience with unRAID and it fits their needs.
I started a thread about a homebuilt NAS awhile back on here and learned a lot. People mentioned ZFS and RAID 5 among other things and it all seemed a bit overkill, plus a little too expensive.
I basically just want an NAS to store all my HD videos, pics, music, etc. I want to maintain a small form factor with my HTPC so an NAS just made sense.
I back up all my photos online since those aren't replaceable obviously, but still want peace of mind that I won't lose EVERYTHING if a drive fails in my NAS. I read over the website, but still have a few questions:
1) From what I understand, you need one parity drive. One parity drive for up to 7 drives?
2) Does the parity drive need to be bigger than or equal to biggest storage drive?
3) I've heard someone mention a separate cache drive is helpful too?
4) With a RAID5 array you have to format everything before adding a disk, but with unRAID you can add more disks to the array without needing to format, correct?
I appreciate all the good info, unRAID seems almost perfect for my needs.
I started a thread about a homebuilt NAS awhile back on here and learned a lot. People mentioned ZFS and RAID 5 among other things and it all seemed a bit overkill, plus a little too expensive.
I basically just want an NAS to store all my HD videos, pics, music, etc. I want to maintain a small form factor with my HTPC so an NAS just made sense.
I back up all my photos online since those aren't replaceable obviously, but still want peace of mind that I won't lose EVERYTHING if a drive fails in my NAS. I read over the website, but still have a few questions:
1) From what I understand, you need one parity drive. One parity drive for up to 7 drives?
2) Does the parity drive need to be bigger than or equal to biggest storage drive?
3) I've heard someone mention a separate cache drive is helpful too?
4) With a RAID5 array you have to format everything before adding a disk, but with unRAID you can add more disks to the array without needing to format, correct?
I appreciate all the good info, unRAID seems almost perfect for my needs.
1) From what I understand, you need one parity drive. One parity drive for up to 7 drives?
--If you want parity protection, you need one parity drive, but you can go without it - of course then no protection for a drive failure. unRaid has three license levels - free (3 drives), then a 6 drive license and then the pro, which is ~20 drives. I believe the parity drive counts against the drive count for those licenses, so for the free you can have up to 2 data drives and 1 parity drive, but I don't think you can go with 3 data drives.
2) Does the parity drive need to be bigger than or equal to biggest storage drive?
--Yes, as big (to the bit) or bigger than any other drive in the array. I'm not sure if the latest unRaid supports 3TB drives (I don't have any yet). Other than that, you can mix drives of any size/type. I'm running a mix of 2TB down to 250GB drives, mostly sata, but at least one 320GB ide drive.
3) I've heard someone mention a separate cache drive is helpful too?
--It is, but maybe not as much as when it was first introduced as since then the unRaid write performance has improved. If you write a number of large files daily and IF you have a solid Gbit network, a cache drive may be helpful. I believe only the highest license (pro?) allows for a cache drive. I average writing one large file (media or PC backup) about five times a week and have not bothered with a cache drive - my drive count is currently limited by drive bays in my case and not by my unRaid license.
4) With a RAID5 array you have to format everything before adding a disk, but with unRAID you can add more disks to the array without needing to format, correct?
--Yep! There is a "pre-clear" script that many unRaid users run to get the drive ready which reduces array downtime while adding it plus has the added benefit of running a thorough test on the drive. There is some array "down-time" while adding a drive, or upgrading an existing drive, but not anything like rebuilding a traditional array.
Definitely check out the unRaid (limetechnology) forums for more info.
One thing that is a bit "freaky" with unRaid, is you can literally power it down, remove a data drive, start it up, and then stream a movie that was stored on the drive you removed! You can also write to a failed/missing drive.
I have done this, although technically in this scenario you are just writing to the parity drive. The parity drive in conjunction with all the other data drives can serve up the contents of a failed drive real-time. If you replace a failed drive, or while upgrading a drive to a larger size, once unRaid starts rebuilding that drive, it is available very soon, you do not have to wait until that drive is done rebuilding to access it or the array (although the less you access that drive the faster it rebuilds obviously).
Home media and backup storage is really unRaid's best use as in these scenarios, usage is typically write-to-occassionally and read-often.
edited to add: Give the free version of unRaid a try - all you need is a motherboard that will boot of a flash, an existing desktop will temporarily work here,, a flash with the free version of unRaid on it, and a couple of blank hard drives. Disconnect any other hard drives/optical drives from the motherboard, connect the blank ones, boot from the flash, configure the drives, let them format, and then see your unRaid box on your network.
--If you want parity protection, you need one parity drive, but you can go without it - of course then no protection for a drive failure. unRaid has three license levels - free (3 drives), then a 6 drive license and then the pro, which is ~20 drives. I believe the parity drive counts against the drive count for those licenses, so for the free you can have up to 2 data drives and 1 parity drive, but I don't think you can go with 3 data drives.
2) Does the parity drive need to be bigger than or equal to biggest storage drive?
--Yes, as big (to the bit) or bigger than any other drive in the array. I'm not sure if the latest unRaid supports 3TB drives (I don't have any yet). Other than that, you can mix drives of any size/type. I'm running a mix of 2TB down to 250GB drives, mostly sata, but at least one 320GB ide drive.
3) I've heard someone mention a separate cache drive is helpful too?
--It is, but maybe not as much as when it was first introduced as since then the unRaid write performance has improved. If you write a number of large files daily and IF you have a solid Gbit network, a cache drive may be helpful. I believe only the highest license (pro?) allows for a cache drive. I average writing one large file (media or PC backup) about five times a week and have not bothered with a cache drive - my drive count is currently limited by drive bays in my case and not by my unRaid license.
4) With a RAID5 array you have to format everything before adding a disk, but with unRAID you can add more disks to the array without needing to format, correct?
--Yep! There is a "pre-clear" script that many unRaid users run to get the drive ready which reduces array downtime while adding it plus has the added benefit of running a thorough test on the drive. There is some array "down-time" while adding a drive, or upgrading an existing drive, but not anything like rebuilding a traditional array.
Definitely check out the unRaid (limetechnology) forums for more info.
One thing that is a bit "freaky" with unRaid, is you can literally power it down, remove a data drive, start it up, and then stream a movie that was stored on the drive you removed! You can also write to a failed/missing drive.
I have done this, although technically in this scenario you are just writing to the parity drive. The parity drive in conjunction with all the other data drives can serve up the contents of a failed drive real-time. If you replace a failed drive, or while upgrading a drive to a larger size, once unRaid starts rebuilding that drive, it is available very soon, you do not have to wait until that drive is done rebuilding to access it or the array (although the less you access that drive the faster it rebuilds obviously).Home media and backup storage is really unRaid's best use as in these scenarios, usage is typically write-to-occassionally and read-often.
edited to add: Give the free version of unRaid a try - all you need is a motherboard that will boot of a flash, an existing desktop will temporarily work here,
, a flash with the free version of unRaid on it, and a couple of blank hard drives. Disconnect any other hard drives/optical drives from the motherboard, connect the blank ones, boot from the flash, configure the drives, let them format, and then see your unRaid box on your network.Awesome, you are the man JRS.
It sounds pretty good to me, I'll have to give it a try ASAP. I found the forums and the Wiki, I'll read over it some more.
I have a 1 TB enterprise drive I got cheap, and then a few non-enterprise 1TB drives. Since unRAID powers down drives not in use, I really shouldn't have to worry as much about drives failing due to vibration I hope.
Thanks for the help.
It sounds pretty good to me, I'll have to give it a try ASAP. I found the forums and the Wiki, I'll read over it some more.
I have a 1 TB enterprise drive I got cheap, and then a few non-enterprise 1TB drives. Since unRAID powers down drives not in use, I really shouldn't have to worry as much about drives failing due to vibration I hope.
Thanks for the help.
Dangman
Ninja Editor SuperMod
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2005
- Messages
- 46,056
Many good or up to date software RAID, fakeRAID, and true hardware RAID solutions support Online Capacity expansion or similar feature which allows you to add a hard drive to an existing RAID 5 array without reformatting the whole array.
Anyway, good luck with unRAID.
Personally I just started using flexraid. I wouldn't recommend it yet (not enough experience) but one very nice thing is that you can start with filled drives. So in a few hours, you can have a parity drive protecting your XX drives full of data. Also, it's free.
Just wanted to chime in and say that I used unRAID for a couple of years. I never had a problem with it and the online support community was great. I think it was best solution for me before looking into ZFS servers.
Don't have time to read the rest of the comments right now, but perhaps later tonight.
Don't have time to read the rest of the comments right now, but perhaps later tonight.
To me unRAID looks like a hack, although with nice features such as
1) only spins up disks you need data from
2) disk failure beyond parity protection only affects data on the failed disks
3) can be used to protect already filled disks
While I agree those features are nice, my experience over a decade tells me that ZFS' most distinguished feature trumps them all: checksums over all meta-/data.
What I don't quite get yet - because I haven't looked too deep - is whether unRAID operates at the block level or filesystem level. Also, transfer speeds are only that of a single drive with write speeds being much lower.
1) only spins up disks you need data from
2) disk failure beyond parity protection only affects data on the failed disks
3) can be used to protect already filled disks
While I agree those features are nice, my experience over a decade tells me that ZFS' most distinguished feature trumps them all: checksums over all meta-/data.
What I don't quite get yet - because I haven't looked too deep - is whether unRAID operates at the block level or filesystem level. Also, transfer speeds are only that of a single drive with write speeds being much lower.
N° 3 is false, Unraid needs empty drives (they have to be formated to use reiserFS).
BTW here is a small easy list to compare raids & pseudo-raid : http://snapraid.sourceforge.net/compare.html
Unraid & ZFS are "real time raid"...
SnapRaid/FlexRaid are snapshot/sync based so they are not real raid. (Dunno if Flexraid2.0 is ready).
All these FlexRaid/SnapRaid/Unraid are vastly superior to everything out there if you want :
- Controlled Data Loss in case of catastrophic hardware failure (at worse you lose the dead disks)
- Infinite Scalability/Flexibility/Upgrade & High HDD Usage (1 parity drive for 1000 HDDs)
They are here to protect you in case SH1T happens and you lose 1HDD on your MEDIA SERVER.
They are not designed for high uptime or high input/output tasks or critical data.
PS : medata checksum while amazing is probably not needed for "home media server".
BTW here is a small easy list to compare raids & pseudo-raid : http://snapraid.sourceforge.net/compare.html
Unraid & ZFS are "real time raid"...
SnapRaid/FlexRaid are snapshot/sync based so they are not real raid. (Dunno if Flexraid2.0 is ready).
All these FlexRaid/SnapRaid/Unraid are vastly superior to everything out there if you want :
- Controlled Data Loss in case of catastrophic hardware failure (at worse you lose the dead disks)
- Infinite Scalability/Flexibility/Upgrade & High HDD Usage (1 parity drive for 1000 HDDs)
They are here to protect you in case SH1T happens and you lose 1HDD on your MEDIA SERVER.
They are not designed for high uptime or high input/output tasks or critical data.
PS : medata checksum while amazing is probably not needed for "home media server".
Metadata even more so than normal data. A glitch in a movie you can ignore. A glitch in a directory entry making dozens/hundreds of files unavailable is seriously worse.
FlexRAID 2 is in beta currently, and offers real time raid (I think flexraid 1 did too). Other features of flexraid are the ability to protect drives (or even optical disks) that aren't all connected at the same time. There is also RAID infinity, meaning as many data drives and as many parity drives as you want, with the corresponding failure recovery abilities.
I agree that ZFS features are very nice, but with ZFS I would still make full backups because if something goes wrong, you are left with nothing. Also, I would need server hardware with ECC RAM.
Currently, I make the checksums myself, a straining process, but reliable.
I agree that ZFS features are very nice, but with ZFS I would still make full backups because if something goes wrong, you are left with nothing. Also, I would need server hardware with ECC RAM.
Currently, I make the checksums myself, a straining process, but reliable.
Except there is no point in trusting the internal checksums of ZFS, if the RAM can make errors undetected.
You mean upgrade to bigger drives, because the parity drive (or drives) must already be same size/bigger than the data drives.
Right, for example, if I'm upgrading one of the drives to 2TB, I'd also need to upgrade my parity drive, and I was just wondering if it was easy.
Hop-Scotch
Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2010
- Messages
- 954
If you have the ports:
Add the new parity drive to the system, go into flexraid and make it a second PPU. Once synced, remove the original PPU drive from flexraid. Then either power down and pull it, or just turn it into another DRU. Doing it this way, you'll always have a PPU drive setup incase of a drive failure.
Add the new parity drive to the system, go into flexraid and make it a second PPU. Once synced, remove the original PPU drive from flexraid. Then either power down and pull it, or just turn it into another DRU. Doing it this way, you'll always have a PPU drive setup incase of a drive failure.
Alright, perfect, thanks. I'll head over to lime-technology's forum and check it out.
Now my only problem is figuring out what to do with the 800 gigs of data on my 1TB drive before I prepare it for the array...
Hop-Scotch
Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2010
- Messages
- 954
My info was for FlexRAID, not unRAID. One reason I chose FlexRAID was because I already had a lot of full or semi-full drives, and all I had to do was add an empty drive to the system for parity and I was done.
Yeah, I'm checking out flexraid too. That would solve my problem.
The big issue right now is that hard drive prices are very high. Otherwise, the options using hardware or software RAID 1 are pretty darn good for media servers. Actually, WHS V1's drive extender was a lot better than people give it credit for. With high hard drive prices for the next year (maybe more) RAID 6/ Z2 starts to look better.
For this application one major thing to remember is that you do not want to risk data loss as you get larger media collections. Re-ripping physical media takes a long time. Single parity is not really ideal with today's large consumer drives.
For this application one major thing to remember is that you do not want to risk data loss as you get larger media collections. Re-ripping physical media takes a long time. Single parity is not really ideal with today's large consumer drives.
That's very true. I know there's a chance you may lose more than one drive at once, but I can live with just replacing the media that was on those drives. Movies and music are replaceable, other things are not. I plan on having plenty of redundancy with my photos and other files that aren't replaceable.
I can see single parity being a big problem in applications where the data stored on the server is critical, of course.
So... Uh.. Remember that one time... that no one remembered what they were talking about... Yeah... Uh.. That's this... ^^^^
Can the newest version of flexraid rebuild the parity file(s) on the fly whenever a file protected on another device is modified / changed? Last time I tried it a while ago that was an issue for me. It was nice though due to the ease of setup on windows and worked well for static files. Also, beyond raidz3 I think you might start creating more vdev's or mirror a pool a few times?