Quote:
Originally Posted by
WeeboTech 
A few questions for those of you with Areca cards.
I'm exploring the possibility of Arcea support under unRAID
1. Is it possible to do a SAFE33 or SAFE50 type arrangement on the hardware raid card.
I.E. Similar to Intel's matrix raid or Silicon Image Steelvine SAFE50 Arrangement.
I wanted to make sure I understood the Areca's FW before answering your question, so I just created a total of 4 volumes on a single 4 disk raidset. The answer is yes, you can mimic SAFE33 or SAFE50, but better still you are not limited to those configs. You could create your own "SAFE90" variant that used 90% of the array's available space for example, or 3 SAFE33's, etc.
One limitation is that if you want to create a Raid 1 volume on a raidset with more than two disks then Raid10 is necessary (Raid 1 across two Raid 0's). Not that this is a problem as Raid10 is much faster than Raid1 anyways. If you are creating multiple volumes on a 2 disk raidset I don't believe you'd have this limitation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WeeboTech 
What I'm, looking to do is have 2 drives setup with part as RAID0 and part as RAID1.
Based on my testing above I don't see how this would be a problem, but after I finish stress testing my new setup I'll try creating a 2 disk raidset with 2 volumes to verify.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WeeboTech 
2. The manual mentions pass through mode. Has anyone tried this and if so how is it working? Anyone try this with Llinux? Is linux able to access the drives do to a smartctl check?
Haven't tried pass through mode yet. I assume it simply makes a single disk available to the host OS outside of an array (similar to JBOD). Can't speak to linux atm. I had ESX 3i installed as I was going to use it in my new system, so I could have tested this, but it doesn't support the VT on my DSBF-DE or e5420 out of the box (not sure which), so I couldn't create 64bit guests. I didn't feel like fiddling, so now I'm on Hyper-V 2008 (Considerably slower disk i/o compared to ESX, but it just works :/)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jason4207 
Edit: Also wanted to add that when you pick a PSU don't just get one that's $80-$120. You need to pick out a quality PSU. The Corsair's have an excellent reputation. Google 'jonnyguru' for some other good recommendations.
I agree with jason on this. I don't care what brand you choose as long as you do your research and make sure you're buying a high quality psu. Permanently losing an 8 disk array because your $60 PSU fried the hdd's would be a bad day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
kapone 
For what? why?


Windows 2003 or 2008 do not have any media center components, and unless you're gonna be using any native recording software from those cards, there's no reason to have the tuners in the server.
Now, if you were running Vista on the server, it would make sense, ....but Vista doesn't do software RAID-5...

Not even Ultimate... hasn't been hacked yet.
If he didn't reply already I was going to explain the benefits of running tuner hardware in a server/client configuration across the network.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
garycase2001 
I'm leaning strongly towards an Areca card; but certainly don't like the cost of this vs. a couple of Supermicro 8-port cards (coupled with the onboard SATA ports, these easily support 20 drives).
In addition to the faster computations, a hardware card provides two key features: (a) staggered spinup; and (b) array spindown.
The downside seems to be the potential compatibility issues with various drives (discussed at some length in the 48-TB storage thread). If it wasn't for those issues, I'd almost certainly have already bought an Areca card.
I
just received a new 1280ml-24 (2GB ECC) and 4 Seagate 1.5TB hdd's (ST31500341AS) to test. I sent my 1680ix back to newegg after my 2 weeks of hard work dialing it in to be reliable resulted in a rock solid 8 disk array (WD1001FALS) with write speeds of only 80MB/sec (BLEH!).
I'm in the process of configuring the new card so that I can perform some stress tests and see how reliable this configuration is. I looked everywhere for concrete compatibility data between the 1280ml and Seagate 1.5TB, but couldn't find it, so I guess I'm going to be the guinea pig

.
I'll post my results, good or bad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
LuncHwagon 
I have a question about the actual read/writes in Raid configurations and the actual throughput of a local network. It seems that through link aggregtion you can hope for a theoretical max throughput of about 250MBps or 2gbps on Cat5e/6. What benefit does my server array provide to my media network by reading at 800MBps? (kudos for that accomplishment kapone) or even at 500MBps? Am I way off base here? or should i just be focused on adding storage capacity and getting my read/writes to a certain level?
You aren't limited to aggregating only 2 links.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
eToolGuy 
The Western Digital drives that I have all have a jumper setting for PM2 or PUIS, (Power Up In Standby). According to the
spec, this would seem to provide a poor man's staggered spinup feature to minimize startup power costs. (Assuming HDD driver support.) If the OS provides spindown support based on inactivity, then the need for hardware RAID would not seem to be so important.
Has anyone ever used this PM2/PUIS jumper setting and will using it provide the power up benefit I am inferring from the spec?
Spindown is supported on a few software raid configurations (Unraid, Linux, etc.). I enabled the PM2 jumper on all 8 of my WD1001FALS drives before plugging them in to my 1680ix. Whoops. None of the drives would spin up in that configuration. I wasn't intersted in testing the PM2 feature unfortunately, so I didn't try connecting them directly to the motherboard. After removing the jumper (disabling PM2) they booted fine with the Areca.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Torquewrench 
I use
GBPVR which has the ability to run clients off of a server. Right now my GBPVR computer is by the TV and has a single drive, but I need more storage and I don't want the noise and heat of so many drives in the room. Putting the tuner cards in the server lets me serve multiple clients (2 laptops and 2 desktop PCs, maybe other TV clients eventually) and also only stream in one direction (vs having to stream recordings from pc with tuners to server, and then from server to client.
That's my rationale, not sure it's the best way but it's all in my head for the moment, so if you've got recommendations on the best way to implement this I'm all ears.
I was going to mention the same thing to Kapone. Though I used Mediaportal or BeyondTV for my client/server setup.
Removing all of those tuners from my clients made interrupted recordings (from people restarting the machines) a thing of the past, not to mention simplifying configuration. It also
significantly reduces the load on the network (no more encoding the streams across the network to the file server).
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Torquewrench 
Here's my current build plan----
Proc.: Athlon XP 2500+ $0 (lying around)
Cooler: Thermalright SLK-900 $0
MotherB: Asus A7N8X-E Deluxe $35 eBay
Memory: 2x1GB PC2700 $0
Video: ATI Radeon 9200SE $0
Optical: DVD-RW $0
HD Ctrlr: Supermicro $110
HDs: 3X Seagate 1TB SATA $0 + $340 (already have 1)
NIC: onboard Gb/s
Windows XP SP3
FlexRAID (the best option I've found yet)
Nice setup, eerily similar to my Unraid server (Though I upgraded my Athlon XP to a Sempron 3000+

)
Can I ask why you aren't purchasing the new 1.5TB drives from Seagate? With FlexRAID it doesn't matter that you already have a 1TB, correct?