Guide To Building A Media Storage Server - Page 22 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #631 of 7891 Old 10-25-2008, 07:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
HappyFunBoater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,992
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiBz View Post

Oh no, not you too !

Well at least your not alone

You guys are really under some false sense security.

Raid 5/6 provides for redundant DISKS, not redundant DATA.

Data is not redundant if it can be completely lost by a single point of failure, ergo failure of the array = ALL DATA GONE.

Btw since we're discussing raid arrays in relation to large media storage;

Have you estimated how long it will take to OCE an existing 20TB array that's 90% full when adding a 1.5TB drive to it ? That's a very long time for your array to be that vulnerable to complete anialition.

The rules have changed, you can of course just pretend that your data is completely protected anyways

Huh?

RAID-5 and 6 protects data from drive failure (1 or 2 drives, depending on RAID level). RAID-6 also protects from data loss in case of bit errors during rebuild.

RAID-5 or 6 does not protect against the server catching fire. It does not protect against the user typing del *.*. It does not protect against viruses corrrupting your data. It does not protect against the OS deleting the partition table or directory structures.

It's pretty clear what RAID does and doesn't do. Where is the false sense of security?
HappyFunBoater is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #632 of 7891 Old 10-25-2008, 08:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MiBz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,093
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyFunBoater View Post

Huh?

RAID-5 and 6 protects data from drive failure (1 or 2 drives, depending on RAID level). RAID-6 also protects from data loss in case of bit errors during rebuild.

RAID-5 or 6 does not protect against the server catching fire. It does not protect against the user typing del *.*. It does not protect against viruses corrrupting your data. It does not protect against the OS deleting the partition table or directory structures.

It's pretty clear what RAID does and doesn't do. Where is the false sense of security?

We're talking about media server storage right? So let's put it in context of the application. Media storage needs to grow as your needs grow.

So I'll ask again.
You have 20TB of media on a single array and you need to add more space ( a drive).

How long does it take to OCE a 20TB array to add a 1.5TB drive.

Keeping in mind that during the OCE the entire 20TB needs to have parity recalculated and the entire stripe set has to be rewritten accross all the drives in the array all over again.

If anything should go wrong during this intense (let's say 3-5 day) procedure, all data is lost.

Honestly the cost of a 16 port hw raid + BBU + spare drive 1.5TB (don't forget this) = $1400

For that money you can buy 7 more 1.5TB drives, safely store a full backup of your data and have no worries.

Not to mention that you can buy your drives as you need them with WHS and in 6 months when 2TB drives are priced where 1TB' drives are now, you can just keep adding the latest and greatest capacity on the fly. What do you do with a the 15 1TB drives in your R5 array when everyone is buying 2TB drives next year ?


But if you still feel that raid is the better solution, it's ok with me
MiBz is offline  
post #633 of 7891 Old 10-25-2008, 09:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MikeSM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,906
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiBz View Post

We're talking about media server storage right? So let's put it in context of the application. Media storage needs to grow as your needs grow.

So I'll ask again.
You have 20TB of media on a single array and you need to add more space ( a drive).

How long does it take to OCE a 20TB array to add a 1.5TB drive.

Keeping in mind that during the OCE the entire 20TB needs to have parity recalculated and the entire stripe set has to be rewritten accross all the drives in the array all over again.

If anything should go wrong during this intense (let's say 3-5 day) procedure, all data is lost.

Honestly the cost of a 16 port hw raid + BBU + spare drive 1.5TB (don't forget this) = $1400

For that money you can buy 7 more 1.5TB drives, safely store a full backup of your data and have no worries.

Not to mention that you can buy your drives as you need them with WHS and in 6 months when 2TB drives are priced where 1TB' drives are now, you can just keep adding the latest and greatest capacity on the fly. What do you do with a the 15 1TB drives in your R5 array when everyone is buying 2TB drives next year ?


But if you still feel that raid is the better solution, it's ok with me

Sigh. You keep missing the point! Don't put 12 or 15 drives in a single array! It's not a good configuration, even with RAID6!
MikeSM is offline  
post #634 of 7891 Old 10-25-2008, 09:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MiBz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,093
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeSM View Post

Sigh. You keep missing the point! Don't put 12 or 15 drives in a single array! It's not a good configuration, even with RAID6!

So, now what you're saying is you're going to spend all the money and trouble and risk on a raid array, your data isn't backed up anywhere and now you have to deal with storing and splitting your media on multiple drive letters too ?

Ok so I'm the one who keeps missing the point ? lol
You guys crack me up

I still have yet to hear one convincing point as to why raid is better tho.
MiBz is offline  
post #635 of 7891 Old 10-25-2008, 09:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Jim HTPC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: South Florida
Posts: 1,278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiBz View Post

I still have yet to hear one convincing point as to why raid is better tho.

How about saving the time to re-rip 200 blu-ray movies (about a month unless you are uber rich or are un-employed and have 24 hours of free time).

If a drive goes bad, and they will, you can insert your handy replacement drive immediately (and yes you were notified by e-mail because you didn't buy a cheapo NAS correct?).

If you wanted "backup" or what we call Disaster Recovery, then you run two RAID 5/6 arrays with the same data synchronized. Add as many as you like to satisfy your paranoid tendencies.

For medical images we use RAID 6 arrays accompanied with disaster relief RAID 6 arrays that are synchronized every day at an off-site location.

For the average media user, I would say RAID 6 is a fair compromise. What are the odds of 3 drives failing at the same time during an eclipse?

You can be scared all you like about the idea of an error during the rebuilding of an array.... it is a possibility. That is why it is also recommended to run redundant power supplies and on a large UPS system to last several hours. And don't buy cheap crap. If you spent 50 cents on a RAID card, well you get what you paid for.

We have not had one array fail in over 7 years. Only drives.
Jim HTPC is offline  
post #636 of 7891 Old 10-25-2008, 09:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ilovejedd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,725
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by garycase2001 View Post

Especially with either WHS, where you'd lose one disks worth of data if a disk failed (and none of your critical duplicated data), or with UnRAID, where you'd lose nothing with a single disk failure and one disk worth if two drives failed (unlike the possibility of losing everything on a RAID-5 array with two disk failures).

I noticed this comment just now. As I recall, if you get two drive failures in unRAID, you lose the contents of both drives as there's not enough info on the parity and remaining drives to rebuild. For a two-drive failure, that's equivalent to WHS, worse than RAID6, but still better than RAID5.
ilovejedd is offline  
post #637 of 7891 Old 10-25-2008, 10:11 PM
Member
 
xeonicxpression's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 123
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiBz View Post

So, now what you're saying is you're going to spend all the money and trouble and risk on a raid array, your data isn't backed up anywhere and now you have to deal with storing and splitting your media on multiple drive letters too ?

Ok so I'm the one who keeps missing the point ? lol
You guys crack me up

I still have yet to hear one convincing point as to why raid is better tho.

Is there really any reason to keep going back and forth over this? It just seems like a pissing match over striping and mirroring. This both have their applications. For high throughput applications raid is the logical choice. Yes it isn't seperate physical duplication, but you can't deny that it does provide extra protection over JBOD. Mirroring in the same server or even the same site isn't really giving you that great of a backup either though. If lightning hits your server and takes out the whole thing mirroring isn't going to help. If your house burns down, mirroring isn't going to help.

Mirroring also involves much higher cost per gig of storage. If I want 20tb of storage, I don't really want to have to have 40tb of drives to accomplish that. I know you can say "well just mirror the critical stuff". Well, in a movie server what is critical and what isn't? What's the difference if I have to rerip movie X or movie Y?

Personally I don't think I'll go with raid, but I'm sure as hell not wasting the money on mirroring. I don't need the high throughput that raid provides, nor do I wan't to have to worry about losing the whole array due to controller failure or whatever. I'm not going to spend twice the amount on storage just so I can have an onsite backup that can get fried or burn up. I plan on using something like unraid or ideally flexraid. That is assuming flexraid doesn't get abandonded.

xeonicxpression is offline  
post #638 of 7891 Old 10-25-2008, 11:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lymzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: lalaland
Posts: 3,073
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiBz View Post



I still have yet to hear one convincing point as to why raid is better tho.

How many raid failures have you personally experienced? I am curious.

HDPLEX
lymzy is offline  
post #639 of 7891 Old 10-26-2008, 05:47 AM
Member
 
curtvm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 93
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
A little different 'media server' I have put together using-

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16811219029
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813127041
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819115052
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822136151 (4ea)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16817371005
2GB memory
Vista Basic

I use this as a SageTV server for my Sage STX-HD100, along with a HDHomerun and an R5000-HD/Vip211. I ended up using the abit matx motherboard since I already had it, and I think the cheap 945 motherboards are nice and 'simple'. I installed Vista Basic using an external usb drive (no cd drives in server), and Vista had all the hardware drivers needed. I'm not a big fan of Vista, but it does seem to work ok and there seems to be enough 'little' things that kept me from using XP (like being able to easily use an external usb drive to install, and no drivers required for the 945 m/b). I have been using SageTV + Vista for several months now, and both seem very reliable. I could have used any version of Vista (and probably should have used Business for the rdp), but decided Basic is all I need.

I have the system drive (1TB) divided into 2 partitions, and the first is where Vista lives (40gb partition), the second is where all recorded tv goes. The other 3 drives are where archived recordings go (I have 1TB of Olympics, and about 1TB of other recordings). The 3 drives are spun down most of the time, so drive heat from the 4 drives is next to nothing. The whole system is very quiet (I don't use any case fans, as they are not needed). I don't care about losing a drive, except for the system partition which I backup 'live' as an image file and will be able to restore easily. If I have recordings that I really want to 'protect', I'll copy them to a dvd or keep multiple copies, or maybe have another drive as an 'important recording backup' drive.

Right now I use TeamViewer to remotely administer the server (I was using LogMeIn, but I think I like TeamViewer better).

I have 2 pci and 1 pci-e that I'll eventually use. I'll probably add a gb ethernet card first, so the hdhomerun can be on the m/b ethernet by itself (sage doesn't filter the subchannel yet, so the qam recordings sometimes stream the whole channel- 38mb/s). If I add more drives, I'll install a 4port sata card, remove the current horizontal drive mounting system, and simply make my own mounting system (drives can fit vertically in front of case, and about 12 can actually fit up front with a little space between each drive).

I don't even know what the transfer speed is between drives (I don't pay attention, and don't really care), but I do sometimes transfer recordings to an external usb drive and transfers average about 30MB/s.

So, that's my variation of a 'media server'.
curtvm is offline  
post #640 of 7891 Old 10-26-2008, 07:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
HappyFunBoater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,992
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiBz View Post

We're talking about media server storage right? So let's put it in context of the application. Media storage needs to grow as your needs grow.

So I'll ask again.
You have 20TB of media on a single array and you need to add more space ( a drive).

How long does it take to OCE a 20TB array to add a 1.5TB drive.

It would take a few days. We could figure out a more precise answer, but that's probably close enough for what we discussing here.

Quote:


Keeping in mind that during the OCE the entire 20TB needs to have parity recalculated and the entire stripe set has to be rewritten accross all the drives in the array all over again.

If anything should go wrong during this intense (let's say 3-5 day) procedure, all data is lost.

That is 100% wrong. The data is always protected using either the new or the old parity striping. The data is never unprotected. Even the stripe being worked on is protected using temporary disk stroage.

Quote:


Honestly the cost of a 16 port hw raid + BBU + spare drive 1.5TB (don't forget this) = $1400

For that money you can buy 7 more 1.5TB drives, safely store a full backup of your data and have no worries.

Not to mention that you can buy your drives as you need them with WHS and in 6 months when 2TB drives are priced where 1TB' drives are now, you can just keep adding the latest and greatest capacity on the fly. What do you do with a the 15 1TB drives in your R5 array when everyone is buying 2TB drives next year ?

What do you mean "what do you do with them"? You keep using them. And then you need more drives you buy them. Capacity doesn't matter.

Quote:


But if you still feel that raid is the better solution, it's ok with me

What are you talking about? I didn't say RAID was a better solution. Better than what? RAID has pros and cons. WHS has pros and cons. There are lots of ways to accomplish similar goals, all with pros and cons. This is just a discussion of facts. Feelings have nothing to do with it.
HappyFunBoater is offline  
post #641 of 7891 Old 10-26-2008, 08:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
HappyFunBoater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,992
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiBz View Post

I still have yet to hear one convincing point as to why raid is better tho.

The problem is that you're not asking a meaningful question. Better than what? Everything has pros and cons, and different goals. Asking whether RAID, WHS or backup is better is like asking if pears, Hondas or Ethernet cables are better.

Are you perhaps talking about one particular poster's implementation and their choice of technology? Let's talk about what's really bugging you. The more general discussions of technology, like RAID, isn't getting you anywhere because it's hard to discuss the merits of a technology without a clear set of goals. Is there a case where someone used RAID when you think they shouldn't have?
HappyFunBoater is offline  
post #642 of 7891 Old 10-26-2008, 08:25 AM
Member
 
TexasAg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiBz View Post

If anything should go wrong during this intense (let's say 3-5 day) procedure, all data is lost.

That's actually exactly the issue that RAID 6 is meant to address. The chance of multiple simultaneous disk failures in an array is very small. The benefit of RAID 6 is the data protection you get during lengthy rebuilds.
TexasAg is offline  
post #643 of 7891 Old 10-26-2008, 08:30 AM
Member
 
TexasAg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyFunBoater View Post

What do you mean "what do you do with them"? You keep using them. And then you need more drives you buy them. Capacity doesn't matter.

I think his point is that with RAID, you're stuck on whatever size drives you create the array with. If you have a 1TB disk based RAID array, you don't have a way to add 2TB drives into the array in 12-18 months when they're the same price. Technically you can add them, but they'll function as 1TB drives.
TexasAg is offline  
post #644 of 7891 Old 10-26-2008, 08:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kapone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,429
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 126
This is kind of a moot discussion. There are reasons people run RAID. There are reasons people run WHS, unRAID, Flex-Raid, xxx-Raid, whatever RAID. Point being, each has it's pros and cons.

The problem is that the deifnition of a "Home media server" has a very large spectrum. To some, it is just a file server serving files. To others it's a lot more. Your storage strategy is obviously affected by the usage of such systems.
kapone is offline  
post #645 of 7891 Old 10-26-2008, 08:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
HappyFunBoater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,992
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasAg View Post

I think his point is that with RAID, you're stuck on whatever size drives you create the array with. If you have a 1TB disk based RAID array, you don't have a way to add 2TB drives into the array in 12-18 months when they're the same price. Technically you can add them, but they'll function as 1TB drives.

You can use the additional, unused space to create another array - RAID-0, 1, or 5 depending on how many drives there are. And I'd agree that this is a slight con to RAID versus WHS. But the pro over WHS is that the storage is much more efficient - parity vs mirroring.
HappyFunBoater is offline  
post #646 of 7891 Old 10-26-2008, 08:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kapone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,429
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 126
Quote:


Oh no, not you too !

Well at least your not alone

You guys are really under some false sense security.

Raid 5/6 provides for redundant DISKS, not redundant DATA.

I didn't realize we are getting down to the technical definitions and trying to make a distinction. I was being "generic".

Quote:


Data is not redundant if it can be completely lost by a single point of failure, ergo failure of the array = ALL DATA GONE.

EVERY storage architecture has point(s) of failure. EVERY. You gotta pick your poison.

Quote:


Btw since we're discussing raid arrays in relation to large media storage;

Have you estimated how long it will take to OCE an existing 20TB array that's 90% full when adding a 1.5TB drive to it ? That's a very long time for your array to be that vulnerable to complete anialition.

Wrong. In most "well executed" RAID implementations, if during OCE, a bit/sector/block error is encountered, you do lose data but not the full array. Yes, you may end up losing data on one or more files, but your array will still be fine. That's the whole point of having redundant "disks".

Quote:


The rules have changed, you can of course just pretend that your data is completely protected anyways

There is no such thing as "complete" protection. Even if you have a duplicate data store, stored offsite, in a facility 1000 miles away, there IS still a possibility that you may lose data in both locations. (extreme example, massive lightning strikes in both locations, nuclear attack/accident in both locations, natural disasters in both locations...)

Point being there is ALWAYS a "possibility" (however small it might be) that you may lose data even if it has replicated, or triplicated or quadriplicated or whatever. There is no such thing as "complete" protection.
kapone is offline  
post #647 of 7891 Old 10-26-2008, 09:31 AM
Member
 
jdr1000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 57
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Can anyone recommend a drive case that will fit into a rack under 25" deep? Unless I am confused the Norcos do not. I neet a 10-20 drive case for my media rack. How deep the case is will be an issue in my new install.

Thanks in advance..

J
jdr1000 is offline  
post #648 of 7891 Old 10-26-2008, 09:43 AM
Advanced Member
 
Requis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: around the world
Posts: 582
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Not sure if this helps anyone but the way we have now done it here is 24 500 Gb drives behind two AMCC 12 port Raid controllers and all files backed up on drives that are offline. Simply from a cost perspective this has worked for us as a result of drive costs coming down we replace in line raid 5 drives with the bigger drives and turn the other drives into an archive of sorts. Format drive and addnew files from the array onto the drives then take them offline.

We have had two drive failures but never on the same array, and were able to simply restore the array with a new drive. But we figure for our piece of mind to MBIZ's point we also added an extra layer of redundancy in having drives offline (no power) sitting in a closet.

Thanks for all the info on these posts...especially for the Norco case's...thats been awesome...just finnished my transfer!

Cheers,

requis
Requis is offline  
post #649 of 7891 Old 10-26-2008, 09:49 AM
Advanced Member
 
Requis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: around the world
Posts: 582
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdr1000 View Post

Can anyone recommend a drive case that will fit into a rack under 25" deep? Unless I am confused the Norcos do not. I neet a 10-20 drive case for my media rack. How deep the case is will be an issue in my new install.

Thanks in advance..

J

Here is what we used, have 2 of em...but they cost considerably more than the Norco case.

I would sell them as I have replaced them with the norco 4020 cases but I'd never get the money I want for them as shipping duty to Canada etc made that project a bit pricey.

http://www.rackmountmart.com/rd/3uTable.htm

Cheers,

Requis
Requis is offline  
post #650 of 7891 Old 10-26-2008, 12:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MikeSM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,906
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiBz View Post

So, now what you're saying is you're going to spend all the money and trouble and risk on a raid array, your data isn't backed up anywhere and now you have to deal with storing and splitting your media on multiple drive letters too ?

Ok so I'm the one who keeps missing the point ? lol
You guys crack me up

I still have yet to hear one convincing point as to why raid is better tho.

Sigh... That is what volume management is for! In Linux, that's done with LVM. You can take multiple raid arrays, create a single logical volume that spans the arrays, and use it as one filesystem, or multiple different filesystems if you want. It also allows you to add a new array, and transfer volume info from the old one to the new one all while the filesystem is online.

I assume windows has something similar.

Creating huge arrays of disks as one physical array is a bad idea. Better to split them up in smaller groups. I have 2 7 disk raid5 arrays all with 1 TB disks. This also allows you to keep a hot spare available so it can automatically replace a bad disk in either of the two arrays.

I think you must use volume management to solve a lot of these issues, and it helps use RAID in a safer and more effective way. I would avoid trying to run a filesystem directly over a RAID array, especially a very large one. It's just too inflexible.
MikeSM is offline  
post #651 of 7891 Old 10-26-2008, 12:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MikeSM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,906
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasAg View Post

I think his point is that with RAID, you're stuck on whatever size drives you create the array with. If you have a 1TB disk based RAID array, you don't have a way to add 2TB drives into the array in 12-18 months when they're the same price. Technically you can add them, but they'll function as 1TB drives.

It's better to create a 2nd raid array with the 2 Tb disks and then extend the volume to include the new array. Adding lots of disks to a single array can be very unwise.
MikeSM is offline  
post #652 of 7891 Old 10-26-2008, 03:15 PM
Member
 
xeonicxpression's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 123
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Since odditory hasn't been on in 20 days now, does anyone else want to take up the task of posting some suggested systems? Someone who has a post on the first page could edit their post. I'm sure odditory has just gotten too busy to keep up with this, which is understandable. I know that some people have posted their system specs scattered throughout the thread, but it is now 22 pages long, and will only get longer, and is a pain to find them. There has been a lot of talk about parity vs mirroring and I think it would be more benificial to nail down some actual systems and then discuss the merits of each system.

xeonicxpression is offline  
post #653 of 7891 Old 10-26-2008, 03:25 PM
Member
 
mariomp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 141
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Guys, I have a weird WHS problem.
Brand new install, no other data on it. All updates installed.
Two 1.5tb drives sitting on AOC-SAT2-MV8 with no data on them. Pooled.
150Gb O/S drive. 750 Gb video drive (not pooled yet as its full of DVDs).
Everything was working fine until I shut down system and removed one of the pooled 1.5Tb drives. Upon power up, WHS showed me how it wasn't happy about missing drive but everything worked fine. I powered down the system and re-inserted the drive and now WHS won't start, not even in safe mode. As soon as I remove drive (with system off) and restart, all works OK. I've tried different slots (onboad SATAs and SuperMicro's ones, always same result. I even reformatted the drive and deleted volume information from the drive on another system and its still not happy.

What else should I try to get the system to take this drive again short of doing another complete system build?

Thanks,
Mario
mariomp is offline  
post #654 of 7891 Old 10-26-2008, 03:53 PM
Senior Member
 
dondu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 218
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdr1000 View Post

Can anyone recommend a drive case that will fit into a rack under 25" deep? Unless I am confused the Norcos do not. I neet a 10-20 drive case for my media rack. How deep the case is will be an issue in my new install.

Thanks in advance..

J

I have one of these...
http://www.servercase.com/miva/miva?...egory_Code=4UE

This houses both the PC and the drives. It is a very clean, wide-open case.

I use these...
http://www.servercase.com/miva/miva?...ode=SATA%2FSAS
which I like very much because they are TRAYLESS - the bare drives just slide in. With 4x of these (I only have 1x installed right now) I have room for 12x 3.5" SATAII drives, in the same 4U as the computer, at only 21" deep.

--Don
dondu is offline  
post #655 of 7891 Old 10-26-2008, 04:20 PM
Member
 
WeeboTech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 57
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by xeonicxpression View Post

Since odditory hasn't been on in 20 days now, does anyone else want to take up the task of posting some suggested systems? Someone who has a post on the first page could edit their post. I'm sure odditory has just gotten too busy to keep up with this, which is understandable. I know that some people have posted their system specs scattered throughout the thread, but it is now 22 pages long, and will only get longer, and is a pain to find them. There has been a lot of talk about parity vs mirroring and I think it would be more benificial to nail down some actual systems and then discuss the merits of each system.

Either that or rename this thread to "Questions and Answers on building a Media server". I think the "Guide to building a media server" doesn't seem to fit any longer. As far as a guide, there are basic questions a user must ask themselves, then there are the recommendations to fit those questions. With all of the questions, recommendations and variations within this thread, for a newbie it would seem a bit daunting to discern what a person really needs.
WeeboTech is offline  
post #656 of 7891 Old 10-27-2008, 04:43 AM
Member
 
mariomp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 141
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
OK, so I've got my Norco RPC-4020 case all set up and found out that the fans do not plug into the MoBo, instead they plug directly into molex PSU plug, therefore they're on 100% of the time, blowing (or sucking) at 100% power level. Have any of you converted the molex connector to work off of MoBo to let MoBo control the fan speed?
And if so, where did you get the connector from?

Also, 4020 case requires 10 molex connectors in order to make all 20 drives work, plus 1 for inside and 1 for back fans. My PSU (CORSAIR CMPSU-750TX) doesn't have enough molex's connectors but I do have plenty of PCIe (not using any) as well as SATA-power connectors. Where do you get the convertors for those and which type of plug should I convert based on power draw?

Thanks,
Mario
mariomp is offline  
post #657 of 7891 Old 10-27-2008, 08:13 AM
Senior Member
 
LuncHwagon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 224
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Mario-
You can get a 4pin molex to three pin mobo adapter. I imagine just about every local computer shop has or can get them for a few bucks. Im sure mine were less than $5 each. I've even seen them with resisters to spin them at even lower RPMs.
LuncHwagon is offline  
post #658 of 7891 Old 10-27-2008, 09:06 AM
Member
 
tiredder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by kapone View Post

This is kind of a moot discussion. There are reasons people run RAID. There are reasons people run WHS, unRAID, Flex-Raid, xxx-Raid, whatever RAID. Point being, each has it's pros and cons.

has anybody ever listed these in a decent way to understand what set up would be best for certain use?

just wondering, couldn't find that yet.

Timm
tiredder is offline  
post #659 of 7891 Old 10-27-2008, 09:19 AM
Member
 
kenshin-san's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 89
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mariomp View Post

Also, 4020 case requires 10 molex connectors in order to make all 20 drives work, plus 1 for inside and 1 for back fans. My PSU (CORSAIR CMPSU-750TX) doesn't have enough molex's connectors but I do have plenty of PCIe (not using any) as well as SATA-power connectors. Where do you get the convertors for those and which type of plug should I convert based on power draw?

Thanks,
Mario

I believe you only need 1 molex per backplane for a total of 5 to make all 20 drives work. The second molex on each backplane is redundant from what I've read.

Personally, I just went to Fry's and purchase 4 or 5 molex Y connector's. I never could find a converter to go from Sata to Molex, though I'm sure someone here can link one up.
kenshin-san is offline  
post #660 of 7891 Old 10-27-2008, 09:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
MikeSM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,906
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mariomp View Post

OK, so I've got my Norco RPC-4020 case all set up and found out that the fans do not plug into the MoBo, instead they plug directly into molex PSU plug, therefore they're on 100% of the time, blowing (or sucking) at 100% power level. Have any of you converted the molex connector to work off of MoBo to let MoBo control the fan speed?
And if so, where did you get the connector from?

Also, 4020 case requires 10 molex connectors in order to make all 20 drives work, plus 1 for inside and 1 for back fans. My PSU (CORSAIR CMPSU-750TX) doesn't have enough molex's connectors but I do have plenty of PCIe (not using any) as well as SATA-power connectors. Where do you get the convertors for those and which type of plug should I convert based on power draw?

Thanks,
Mario

Fans don't burn that many watts. Why are you worrying about them? if anytthing, the Norco case needs more oomph in ventilation than less. I replaced the two rear fans with some Delta EHE fans and it helped drop the drive temps by a reasonable amount.

Don't think you are OK if the cpu temps are fine - the issue is disk temps. There are quite a few hints in this thread about taping up holes and doing other things that improve airflow.

I also ran out of molex connectors, but you can get some very nice SATA to molex converters from SVC - look here: http://www.svc.com/ad-y-44-02m.htm They work great - 3 molex's per SATA plug.
MikeSM is offline  
Reply Home Theater Computers

Tags
Computers

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off