AVS › AVS Forum › Video Components › Home Theater Computers › Guide To Building A Media Storage Server
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Guide To Building A Media Storage Server - Page 105

post #3121 of 7777
6/11/09 at 6:09am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Farris View Post

UPS?

Server 2008 seems really expensive, dpending on the version and number of clients. Any idea what sort of version and cost I am looking at?

I am connecting the following to the server:

- 2 PCs (both running vista 32bit)
- 5 Popcorn hour A110 for playing movies in different rooms
- 5 Sling Boxes for music

You want to be part of the technet direct program. You pay $249 a year and get to use every piece of microsoft software (legally). You download the ISO's and get keys from their developer website. It's a great bargain, and enables many of us to use MSFT's enterprise products for home use.
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #3122 of 7777
6/11/09 at 7:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeSM View Post

You want to be part of the technet direct program. You pay $249 a year and get to use every piece of microsoft software (legally). You download the ISO's and get keys from their developer website. It's a great bargain, and enables many of us to use MSFT's enterprise products for home use.

Students get similar benefits for free with Dreamspark also.
Reply
Reply
post #3123 of 7777
6/11/09 at 8:49am
Same for Microsoft BizSpark. It's for startups that use MS technology. Full access to MSDN, Technet and licensed software for 2 years....FREE.
Reply
Reply
post #3124 of 7777
6/11/09 at 9:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by kapone View Post

Same for Microsoft BizSpark. It's for startups that use MS technology. Full access to MSDN, Technet and licensed software for 2 years....FREE.

Didn't know about BizSpark. I was actually getting ready to purchase a Technet subscription, so this may come in handy. MS is reviewing my application as we speak. Thanks!

I can vouch for Server 2008. I have a few evaluation licenses sitting around, and I found it very easy to use and configure, at least for what I'm doing. I am running 3 virtual machines on Hyper-V, and I have VERY little server experience. On my VM's, I have Small Business Server 2008 running my small business apps and acting as a DC, and I am currently setting up a dedicated web server and a dedicated database server (MySQL). As soon as I can spring for some 2TB drives, I will be using the Host OS to run my file server. The only thing you have to be careful of is how to allocate memory among VMs. I just added 8GB for a total of 16GB, but I need my SBS VM to have ample memory since it's running Exchange, Active Directory, etc. For basic file sharing and no VMs, you could easily get away with 2-4GB, I would think.

I love Hyper-V, and I can't wait for R2.
Reply
Reply
post #3125 of 7777
6/11/09 at 9:52am
Server 2008 R2 beta is now on MSDN
Reply
Reply
post #3126 of 7777
6/11/09 at 10:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by xuniman View Post

So far I have to say I haven't had good luck with the 1.5TB drives I've tried. I can't get the WD Greenpower drives to finish initializing a RAID5 array. At least one of them drops out before 30% each time. Maybe I have a bad batch but my 3ware controller doesn't seem to like them at all.

Donato - which 1.5TB drives are you using successfully on a 3ware controller (I have the 9690SA-4I paired with a Chenbro CK12803 expander).

I have 6 x WD15EADS - CK12804 - 9690SA-4I4E in a RAID6. The only issues I've encountered with this setup are the result of bad drives (2 bad out of 8 purchased).

Try the following:

Jumper the Chenbro to original firmware.

Jumper the WD's to SATA1 and set the PHY link speed on the 3ware to SATA1.

If you still can't initialize your array of WD15EADS, then you have one or more bad drives.

You should completely test each drive individually (can't stress this enough) and then enable TLER _before_ you attempt to build an array.
Reply
Reply
post #3127 of 7777
6/11/09 at 10:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by savaytse66 View Post

I can vouch for Server 2008. I have a few evaluation licenses sitting around, and I found it very easy to use and configure, at least for what I'm doing. For basic file sharing and no VMs, you could easily get away with 2-4GB, I would think.

Indeed, Server 2008 is a huge step up and runs much faster then 2003 as well. As for the VMs, you can easily run a file server or domain controller on 512MB of RAM (though I wouldn't do that with Exchange or SQL). 2GB is definitely overkill unless you have it sitting around.
Quote:


I love Hyper-V, and I can't wait for R2.

Especially for use in the enterprise - Hyper-V is an absolute joke for enterprise use as it stands right now. R2 will fix about 2/3 of the major issues.
Reply
Reply
post #3128 of 7777
6/11/09 at 11:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxmm View Post

I have 6 x WD15EADS - CK12804 - 9690SA-4I4E in a RAID6. The only issues I've encountered with this setup are the result of bad drives (2 bad out of 8 purchased).

Try the following:

Jumper the Chenbro to original firmware.

Jumper the WD's to SATA1 and set the PHY link speed on the 3ware to SATA1.

If you still can't initialize your array of WD15EADS, then you have one or more bad drives.

You should completely test each drive individually (can't stress this enough) and then enable TLER _before_ you attempt to build an array.

I haven't tried the original firmware or the downgrade to SATA1 yet. I did test the drives before I used them - what do you use to stress test new drives?

I have enabled TLEr on all the drives.

Thanks for the advice.
Reply
Reply
post #3129 of 7777
6/11/09 at 2:45pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by xuniman View Post

I have a few of the Seagate drives also but they weren't any better when I tried them, of course that was with a motherboard I'm convinced had issues with the PCIe x16 slot I was using. I guess I'll give the Seagates another try. Most had the CC1H firmware but a couple were older units I needed to flash to the newer firmware. I will need to check to see what versions they are running.

As an FYI I just finished a week of various testing on 8 x Seagate 1.5TB drives (all CC1H) connected to an Adaptec 5805 in Raid6. I just happened to have this card and 8 ports is the highest port count 5 series card that Adaptec currently supports for these drives. I let Winthrax run 4 or 5 days straight, and never got a bad stripe or drive kicked out of the array, or ANYTHING in the ASM event log. I ran a Build/Verify a few times and no probs either.

I think the drives are probably okay as far as the stalemate going on right now between raid card vendors and Seagate (each one pointing the finger at the other's firmware, as I've confirmed by talking to both parties), so far now I'm putting a little more blame on the raid card vendors (Adaptec, Areca) to fix the issue on the higher port count cards. I hooked up an Areca 1680ix-24 to the same 8 x Seagate 1.5Tb's, and could not build a RAID6, one random drive of the eight would time out immediately.

Apparently 3Ware makes the only high port count cards that work with the Seagate 1.5Tb's, but I can't confirm.
Reply
Reply
post #3130 of 7777
6/11/09 at 5:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by xuniman View Post

I haven't tried the original firmware or the downgrade to SATA1 yet. I did test the drives before I used them - what do you use to stress test new drives?

Before I add new drives to a RAID, I create new single disk units on the 3ware for each new drive. The 3ware will automatically verify/scrub the entire disk(s), and log any error encountered. Not really a stress test, but it will check every sector and in my experience (WD15EADS firmwares A01 and K05) if the drive passes, it will play just fine with the 3ware. Then you can go ahead and delete the single disk units and use the new drives to expand/build your RAID unit.

The SATA1 downgrade should not be necessary, as long as the drives are good.

If you're using more than 16 drives on the expander, you should go to original firmware on the Chenbro.

An extended test with a smartmon or WDDLG livecd on a secondary box, bios set to IDE mode, is a good way to confirm if you're unsure whether it's the drive or something else causing the error.

Good luck with your build and don't give up on the 3ware with the 1.5TBs
Reply
Reply
post #3131 of 7777
6/11/09 at 5:53pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxmm View Post

Before I add new drives to a RAID, I create new units on the 3ware for each new single drive. The 3ware will automatically verify/scrub the entire disk, and log any error it encounters. Not really a stress test, but it will check every sector and in my experience (WD15EADS firmwares A01 and K05) if the drive passes, it will play just fine with the 3ware. Then you can go ahead and delete the single disk units and use the new drives to expand/build your RAID unit.

This is an excellent idea when dealing with a new drive make/model you haven't worked with before, especially with these new bleeding edge 1.5Tb and 2Tb form factors. Problem is if you begin an OCE, or a Raid level migration (ie Raid5 -> Raid6) and a drive times out or fails during the operation, you've just added a repair operation to the workload of the array card, and depending on make/model of card (they all handle it a bit differently), it usually at least doubles the time you've got to wait for everything to finish, and in rare cases will leave your array in limbo such that all you can do is read from it to back it up somewhere else, then rebuild the array from scratch. Just went through this last week. NOT fun.
Reply
Reply
post #3132 of 7777
6/11/09 at 10:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by donato View Post

farris, i ran crystaldiskmark v2.2 64-bit version in default test mode (5 iterations, 100MB) on my server both on my 10 x 1.5tb RAID6 array (I don't recall my sector size though, maybe 128K) off of the 3ware card as well as my 2 x 300gb velociraptor in RAID 1.

All measurements were in MB/s. Server wasn't completely idle, but only lightweight activity on it.

10 x 1.5tb RAID6 on 3ware
Sequential: 911.1 read, 851.2 write
512K random: 831.9 read, 719.6 write
4K: 41.26 read, 5.843 write

2 X 300GB velociraptor RAID 1 off southbridge
Sequential: 104.5, 69.99
512K: 60.89, 44.58
4K: 0.958, 0.666

so, you can see that for large reads (512k or sequential), you should see plenty of performance. The raid array (this with only 10 drives and effectively only 8 with non-redundant data) has an order of magnitude (i.e. almost 10 times) more transfer capability than a very fast single SATA hard disk.

for kicks, i tested a few more disks I had

7 X 146gb 10k rpm SAS in RAID 0 on adaptec 5405
Sequential: 1183, 871.1
512K: 1051, 786.0
4K: 41.48, 43.67

1 x intel x-25m ssd on adaptec 5405
Sequential: 1140, 82.84
512K: 1013, 143.1
4K: 4.246, 35.63

6 x 73gb 10k rpm SAS in RAID10 on adaptec 5405
Sequential: 1253, 935.8
512K: 1180, 877.6
4K: 72.47, 73.53

6 X 1tb hitachi in RAID 5 off southbridge
Sequential: 569.1, 19.25
512K: 132.8, 13.98
4K: 3.031, 0.380
Reply
Reply
post #3133 of 7777
6/12/09 at 2:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by donato View Post

for kicks, i tested a few more disks I had

7 X 146gb 10k rpm SAS in RAID 0 on adaptec 5405
Sequential: 1183, 871.1
512K: 1051, 786.0
4K: 41.48, 43.67

1 x intel x-25m ssd on adaptec 5405
Sequential: 1140, 82.84
512K: 1013, 143.1
4K: 4.246, 35.63

6 x 73gb 10k rpm SAS in RAID10 on adaptec 5405
Sequential: 1253, 935.8
512K: 1180, 877.6
4K: 72.47, 73.53

6 X 1tb hitachi in RAID 5 off southbridge
Sequential: 569.1, 19.25
512K: 132.8, 13.98
4K: 3.031, 0.380

The SAS results are impressive! What models are they? Wondering how the 6x73GB drives beat the 7x146GB drives. Could you run 6x73GB in RAID0 or a 6x146GB in RAID10 also?
Reply
Reply
post #3134 of 7777
6/12/09 at 6:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Farris View Post

My spec is as follows:

CORSAIR XMS3 12GB (6 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1333 (PC3 10600) Desktop Memory Model HX3X12G1333C9 - Retail
$219.99

ASUS Z8NA-D6 (ASMB4-IKVM) Dual LGA 1366 Intel 5500 ATX Dual Intel Xeon 5500 Series Server Motherboard - Retail
$359.99

...


I know the RAM and dual processors is overkill. But 12GB for $200 what the hell.

...

The motherboard you've selected (good choice) requires registered RAM. The RAM you listed is unbuffered, so it won't work with that board.
Reply
Reply
post #3135 of 7777
6/12/09 at 6:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_beast666 View Post

The SAS results are impressive! What models are they? Wondering how the 6x73GB drives beat the 7x146GB drives. Could you run 6x73GB in RAID0 or a 6x146GB in RAID10 also?

The 73GB are HPs and the 146GB are IBMs.

Yeah, that is strange that six 73GBs in RAID10 beat the seven 146GBs in RAID0. The 6 X 73gb is running windows 2008 server and the 7 X 146GB is running Windows 7 RC1.

These are actually on systems I have built and running at home so I can't just tear them down. I may be rebuilding the 7 X 146 though since the 8th drive in the chassis is the intel SSD listed above and I plan to make that my boot drive. I'll use the 7 X 146 as workspace so I can reconfigure it and play with it, maybe 6 X raid 10, 7 x raid5 and 7 x raid6.
Reply
Reply
post #3136 of 7777
6/12/09 at 8:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by garycase2001 View Post

The motherboard you've selected (good choice) requires registered RAM. The RAM you listed is unbuffered, so it won't work with that board.

That board will take unbuffered DIMMs. However this would be a poor choice, especially when dropping so much money on cpus &the board itself.

For a home server however, s1366 processors are a poor choice (not to mention dual s1366!). The price & power consumption are way too high considering the real performance requirements of servers in the home environment.

Note - I am not saying Nehalem processors & their server equivalents have no use or shouldn't be bought etc (I don't want to get into that debate!). For a workstation where cpu performance is important I believe they are the best choice right now. But for home servers there is simply no need nor reasonable justification for their use.
Reply
Reply
post #3137 of 7777
6/12/09 at 10:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_beast666 View Post

That board will take unbuffered DIMMs. However this would be a poor choice, especially when dropping so much money on cpus &the board itself.

For a home server however, s1366 processors are a poor choice (not to mention dual s1366!). The price & power consumption are way too high considering the real performance requirements of servers in the home environment.

Note - I am not saying Nehalem processors & their server equivalents have no use or shouldn't be bought etc (I don't want to get into that debate!). For a workstation where cpu performance is important I believe they are the best choice right now. But for home servers there is simply no need nor reasonable justification for their use.


Please find my revised spec below:

1 x Server 2008

1 x Intel Core2 Quad Q9400 2.66GHz LGA 775 95W Quad-Core Processor

1x NORCO RPC-4220 4U Rackmount Server Case

1x 3ware 9650SE-24M8 PCI Express x 8 SATA II Red Hot RAID 6 Controller Card

1 x Intel S3210SHLC Server Motherboard

1 x NORCO RL-26 26" 3-sections Ball Bearing Sliding Rail kit for rackmount chassis

2 x Kingston 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM Server Memory Model

20 x Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 1.5TB 3.5" SATA 3.0Gb/s Internal Hard Drive (bare drive)

1 x HP 1800 Pro Curve Switch (http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/uk/en...9-3445962.html)

1 x 850 Watt PSU

Is there anything else that you think I should change or add?

Can you recommend a good battery backup for the Raid Card?

Again my objectives are:
• Stream Blu Ray content to 5 rooms at the same time effortlessly.

• Be able to upload movies on to the server, whilst streaming blu ray content to 4 rooms simultaneously

• Very fast transfer speeds in a Raid 6 configuartion

Thank you for all the help and support! I am ordering tomorrow :-)
Reply
Reply
post #3138 of 7777
6/12/09 at 10:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by donato View Post

whoops, meant to say UPS (uninterruptible power supply - battery backup for your entire system) is a good idea (will edit my original message).

I'm using an MSDN license, so i didn't buy server license directly. I just use the license from my MSDN subscription (which I get through work).

These are presumably evaluation licences, right? How long are they good for eg when would the Server 2008 licencse expire?
Reply
Reply
post #3139 of 7777
6/12/09 at 10:18am
A quick question. If I use WD green drives for software raid in Linux, should I enable TLER?
Reply
Reply
post #3140 of 7777
6/12/09 at 10:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osamede View Post

These are presumably evaluation licences, right? How long are they good for eg when would the Server 2008 licencse expire?

You agree when you sign up to uninstall them if you cancel your subscription, but I don't think this is enforced.
Reply
Reply
post #3141 of 7777
6/12/09 at 10:34am
I'm having some RAID angst. I'm trying to decide on one big RAID6 parition or two smaller ones.

I currently have a 24 port 3ware card with 10 X 1.5tb seagate in RAID6 attached. When I first started this project, I had thought I would start with the 10 drives and then go 20 X 1.5tb in RAID6 via OCE. This was part of the justification in buying the 24-port 3ware.

But in the interim, I started to get a little nervous about having 20 consumer level drives in an array and though perhaps I'd build out the next 10 drives as a second 10 X 1.5tb RAID6 array. (coincidentally, I have a 5+ year old EMC CX500 at work with 5 of 10 drives that have failed (one at a time) in the last 8 months, so maybe that's making me more paranoid)

My original 10 drives are filling up so I just bought and installed another 10 drives, so now I need to figure out what to do.

Do I go 20 X 1.5tb? Pros are maximize storage and only have one logical volume to deal with.

Or do I go 2 X 10 X 1.5tb? Pros are that I reduce my liklihood and extent of a castostrophic failure. Building a second raid 5 array will necessitate 2 more parity drives so I burn 3TB.

For media storage, which is of course the vast majority of the files, I have no other backup, but I can certainly replace/re-rip/re-download by putting in the time.

I've heard the arguments about consumer level drives experiencing read failures every 10^14 bits read so that during a large array rebuild there will likely be a read error. That doesn't trouble me (RAID6 to mitigate and worst case, the loss of individual media file(s) is acceptable). I am more concerned with catastrophic failure which would only happen with a 3rd drive failure before a rebuild to a hot spare can completed.

Am I just being overly conservative/paranoid with dividing up the drives into 2 arrays?
Reply
Reply
post #3142 of 7777
6/12/09 at 10:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Farris View Post

Can you recommend a good battery backup for the Raid Card?

You don't really have much choice here. You need to order the 3ware one. They make two types, one that mounts on the raid card or one that mounts on a separate card. I just bought the one that mounts on the RAID card itself to keep it simple.
Reply
Reply
post #3143 of 7777
6/12/09 at 10:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by donato View Post

I'm having some RAID angst. I'm trying to decide on one big RAID6 parition or two smaller ones.



Am I just being overly conservative/paranoid with dividing up the drives into 2 arrays?

Your best bet would be to create a RAID 60 (if your card supports it) using two 10-disk RAID 6's, striped together. This will give you the best performance and protection. Otherwise just build a second 10disk RAID 6 and use two arrays.

BTW, restriping with 1.5TB drives on my 3ware took ~60 hours to go from 4 to 5 disks, and (!)200 hours to go from 5 to 6. I can't even fathom how long it would take to go from 10 to 20.
Reply
Reply
post #3144 of 7777
6/12/09 at 10:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreydeng View Post

A quick question. If I use WD green drives for software raid in Linux, should I enable TLER?

I would stay away from the GP series in RAID. The power management will get in the way of all the drives acting exactly the same way in a striped RAID configuration and will really hurt performance. As a JBOD drive they are fine though.
Reply
Reply
post #3145 of 7777
6/12/09 at 10:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by donato View Post

You don't really have much choice here. You need to order the 3ware one. They make two types, one that mounts on the raid card or one that mounts on a separate card. I just bought the one that mounts on the RAID card itself to keep it simple.

Is this the one you were referring to? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16816116051

I too would prefer one that fitted on the Riad Controller than having a sperate card, unless one is better than the other.

Forgive my noob question, but what are the advantages of having this?

I appreciate the help.
Reply
Reply
post #3146 of 7777
6/12/09 at 10:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by donato View Post

I'm having some RAID angst. I'm trying to decide on one big RAID6 parition or two smaller ones.

I currently have a 24 port 3ware card with 10 X 1.5tb seagate in RAID6 attached. When I first started this project, I had thought I would start with the 10 drives and then go 20 X 1.5tb in RAID6 via OCE. This was part of the justification in buying the 24-port 3ware.

But in the interim, I started to get a little nervous about having 20 consumer level drives in an array and though perhaps I'd build out the next 10 drives as a second 10 X 1.5tb RAID6 array. (coincidentally, I have a 5+ year old EMC CX500 at work with 5 of 10 drives that have failed (one at a time) in the last 8 months, so maybe that's making me more paranoid)

My original 10 drives are filling up so I just bought and installed another 10 drives, so now I need to figure out what to do.

Do I go 20 X 1.5tb? Pros are maximize storage and only have one logical volume to deal with.

Or do I go 2 X 10 X 1.5tb? Pros are that I reduce my liklihood and extent of a castostrophic failure. Building a second raid 5 array will necessitate 2 more parity drives so I burn 3TB.

For media storage, which is of course the vast majority of the files, I have no other backup, but I can certainly replace/re-rip/re-download by putting in the time.

I've heard the arguments about consumer level drives experiencing read failures every 10^14 bits read so that during a large array rebuild there will likely be a read error. That doesn't trouble me (RAID6 to mitigate and worst case, the loss of individual media file(s) is acceptable). I am more concerned with catastrophic failure which would only happen with a 3rd drive failure before a rebuild to a hot spare can completed.

Am I just being overly conservative/paranoid with dividing up the drives into 2 arrays?

I am pretty conservative and that has saved my bacon with failures before. I would do 2x10 RAID6 volumes, and actually keep them as two separate filesystems if the applications you use can deal with it. If something goes really screwy and you lose a volume you still have half the files, which isn't the case if you use RAID 60 (and you probably don't need the performance either). It would also allow you to upgrade one array of 10 at a time instead of having to two all twenty.

I have 2x8 configuration and it's been good to me, though I have had scary moments with the seagate 1 TB drive issues.
Reply
Reply
post #3147 of 7777
6/12/09 at 11:08am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeSM View Post

I would stay away from the GP series in RAID. The power management will get in the way of all the drives acting exactly the same way in a striped RAID configuration and will really hurt performance. As a JBOD drive they are fine though.

Performance is not the main target for me. I just need to stream 2 BD movies at the same time. The ripping takes time anyway.

If I uses WD GP HDD, do I need to enable TLER or it doesn't care for Linux software raid?
Reply
Reply
post #3148 of 7777
6/12/09 at 11:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by donato View Post



Do I go 20 X 1.5tb? Pros are maximize storage and only have one logical volume to deal with.

A single 20 drive array of anything is not a good idea in an of itself.

Some issues worth considering;

- During a drive failure and subsequent rebuild with a 20 drive array using consumer drives, you'll be bitting your fingernails for days for the rebuild to complete, that is, if it completes without bad block errors. Raid 6 won't do squat for bad blocks if a 2nd drive fails during the rebuild.

- You'll be spinning all 20 drives just by listening to a simple mp3 of the server. At 11w/drive, that's 220w/hr just in drives listening to music.
This is absolutely absurd.

-What happens when the 20 drive array is full. Have you thought about your next move then ? Where would you move your data to deploy 2TB or 3TB drives into an array ? With 2 separate arrays you can OCE the older array with larger drives without risking your entire data set, not to mention the 2-3 weeks it'll take with a 20 drive array. Again more nail biting.

There's more but I think you get the idea.
Reply
Reply
post #3149 of 7777
6/12/09 at 11:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreydeng View Post

Performance is not the main target for me. I just need to stream 2 BD movies at the same time. The ripping takes time anyway.

If I uses WD GP HDD, do I need to enable TLER or it doesn't care for Linux software raid?

You need to enable TLER on any desktop WD drive (including GP drives) whenever the drives are used in a raid 5/6 configuration be it hardware or software. Some people even enable it for raid 1, but it's not necessary.

By default TLER is set to off (disabled) on WD desktop drives. In it's default configuration the drive itself handles any error correction in case the drive doesn't confirm the write. It stays silent and retries to correct the error. This causes the controller or software raid to mark the drive as missing and dumps it off the array and places the array in a degraded state.

By enabling TLER at 7 seconds, it sets a hard limit on the drive's own ability to correct the error at which point it has to reply back to the array controller (hard or soft). In this way the controller knows the drive is still present and corrects the error itself.
Reply
Reply
post #3150 of 7777
6/12/09 at 11:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreydeng View Post

Performance is not the main target for me. I just need to stream 2 BD movies at the same time. The ripping takes time anyway.

If I uses WD GP HDD, do I need to enable TLER or it doesn't care for Linux software raid?

By the way, if I remember correctly you wanted to setup an array to store your movies on WHS, but were under the impression that you couldn't add the array to storage pool and needed to keep it seperate.

Came across this - 2 x 9TB arrays both added to WHS storage pool and thought it may help you achieve what you're looking to accomplish much simpler than you think.

Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Home Theater Computers

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Video Components › Home Theater Computers › Guide To Building A Media Storage Server