AVS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 64 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
81 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am starting to get a large movie collections, with now over 400 movies using 7TB's of data, at the moment i am currently using JBOD.


I want to start a RAID but not quite sure which is the most efficient.


I don't think i need anything over a 1 disk fault tolerance.


So is RAID 5 my best bet?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
959 Posts
RAID 5 would give you the best over all in efficiency, giving good use of available storage space (more drives in the array the the better for this as total storage is (smallest drive)x(number of drives-1) but more drives gives a higher chance of a second drive failure before rebuilding a failed drive) and better performance over JBOB or flexRAID (more drives in the array will higher read/write rates). If you're looking for performance use a true hardware RAID controller(one w/ a lot of ram will give you good write speeds), your onboard RAID is most likely a softRAID as is most of the cheaper controller cards


FlexRAID as stated above is also a good choice while not giving any added performance increase over JBOD it gives you a plus over RAID 5 that if you have multiple drive failures you only loose data on those drives while RAID 5 would lose the whole array (there is software that can recover data from stripped arrays but there's no guaranty that you'll be able to save all or any of you data).


UnRAID would be similar to flexRAID but used on a media server (I'm not sure if you're using one or just a HTPC w/ large storage).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,663 Posts
I would like to disagree on hardware RAID controllers. On a modern processor parity calculations take up hardly any cpu in both Linux and Windows Server - something like 6GBps with 3% cpu.


A true hw controller is expensive ($300+) and you are tied to that controller family for recovering the array. For home use it just isn't worth it, esp on a media server which will see very few writes.


If you decide to use WHS, be aware it doesn't support newer drives (2TB and larger using 4k sectors) and is not being developed anymore.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
229 Posts
I'l also echo the comment about read/writes. Unless you're constantly editing files on the NAS there is no need for powerful raid card. Even if you are worried about write speeds you can use a Cache drive in an unRaid config.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,771 Posts
Some external HDDs for movie storage... Just plug and play lots of movies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
128 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Defcon /forum/post/19648668



If you decide to use WHS, be aware it doesn't support newer drives (2TB and larger using 4k sectors) and is not being developed anymore.

Ummmm....

I have three, 2tb drives.... All you need to do is add a little plastic/metal jumper and short 2 pins. simple. Performance is around 70-90mb's. Never had so much of as a hiccup setting WHS up with these drives.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
61 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Defcon /forum/post/19648668


I would like to disagree on hardware RAID controllers. On a modern processor parity calculations take up hardly any cpu in both Linux and Windows Server - something like 6GBps with 3% cpu.


A true hw controller is expensive ($300+) and you are tied to that controller family for recovering the array. For home use it just isn't worth it, esp on a media server which will see very few writes.


Its not so much the calculations and throughput, in my opinion, as it is the dependability. You can pick up hardware raid controllers for a little over $100 (check Dell PERC5/i). With a battery backup, you won't lose data should your cmos battery die. Have you ever had a dead CMOS battery and have the power go out on a software/motherboard raid system? Guess what. Everything is GONE. Ask me how I know. Also, FWIW, you're tied to whatever you're using for recovering the array for any RAID, not just hardware RAID.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Defcon /forum/post/19648668


... WHS ... is not being developed anymore.

Umm... dude... there's a new beta out called Vail. It is 100% still being developed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeveSSL /forum/post/19649757


Its not so much the calculations and throughput, in my opinion, as it is the dependability. You can pick up hardware raid controllers for a little over $100 (check Dell PERC5/i).

Beware, don't expect a Dell card to just work, I bought a PERC6/i and it wasn't compatible with my Tyan motherboard, it would likely be less compatible with the HTPC motherboards than the Tyan motherboard which was a server board.


I would suggest software RAID unless you are having issues with CPU utilization. A software raid controller for raid 5/6 should be alright if you aren't concerned about CPU. Also software RAID is easier to recover than hardware RAID since software RAID is done in the OS(Window/Linux) and not in the hardware. If the hardware RAID controller dies you really need an exact match where in software you just need the same OS.


I went the more expensive route and picked up an Areca ARC-1680ix-24 along with a 24 bay hot-swappable chassis but I spent around $4k on this which will serve as permanent storage for every computer in my house for many, many years. Currently have 12tb of storage in a RAID 6 array with 300MBs performance.


Do as I say, not as I do
I have spent around $10k on my home setup.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,663 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeveSSL /forum/post/19649757


Its not so much the calculations and throughput, in my opinion, as it is the dependability. You can pick up hardware raid controllers for a little over $100 (check Dell PERC5/i). With a battery backup, you won't lose data should your cmos battery die. Have you ever had a dead CMOS battery and have the power go out on a software/motherboard raid system? Guess what. Everything is GONE. Ask me how I know. Also, FWIW, you're tied to whatever you're using for recovering the array for any RAID, not just hardware RAID.





Umm... dude... there's a new beta out called Vail. It is 100% still being developed.

I'm sure you've heard that DE is dropped from Vail. Without DE Vail is nothing special, this thread is about data redundancy and only WHS with its DE is unique in that regard. Vail has NO announced replacement for it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,631 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by ricabullah /forum/post/19648776


Are we talking about HTPC?


No RAID is needed.



With the time it takes to gather media, some kind of data protection is necessary in my opinion.


I have 8x2tb drives in an external enclosure running raid5. I'd run raid6 if I had a better controller.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
425 Posts
Well, technically for a HTPC you don't need RAID. In the most basic sense a HTPC just plays media...if you start considering RAID it is typically suggested to build a standalone system to store the media...aka a media server.


ricabullah was just being funny.


You are in no way limited to this setup, though it is recommended to have a separate media server if you have multiple HTPCs accessing your media. If you only have one HTPC you can effectively combine the HTPC and media server into an all-in-one computer. In that case I would either go with hardware RAID or FlexRAID and since I use FlexRAID I think you know which solution I'd suggest...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,165 Posts
OK, you seem new to RAID. A RAID 5 or RAID 6 array will stripe the data across all disks. This means that each disk holds some of the data. There is also some redundant error checking data which can re-create the data lost if either 1 or 2 disks go missing. So, RAID5 or RAID6 allows you to recover from one or two failed disks. However, it also means complete loss of all data stored on the array when you go above these disk failure levels.


A RAID controller will generally flag a disk as failed if it doesn't respond properly within a certain time limit. Once it is flagged as failed it must be treated just like a disk that did actually fail. Enterprise drives are built with this in mind and will respond within a reasonable time limit. Cheap home drives are not and they may cause timeouts and disk failures to appear.


There are 3 general types of RAID systems. You can have an add-in RAID card, the operating system do the RAID or the motherboard and BIOS do the RAID. Generally, I've listed these in order from best to worst. In some cases, the add-in RAID card is a piece of crap. Windows doesn't do software RAID.


So, you have to decide. Do I place all my data into a system where either 2 drives or 3 drives fail and I've lost it all? Do I find an alternative that will at least leave me with data on my remaining good drives even if 2 or 3 drives fail?


I personally see no good reason for using a RAID5 or RAID6 array at home. I'm running an unRAID server and copy my important data to an external drive I keep off-site.


Good luck with your decision.


Peter
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,663 Posts
Greyhole is great if you are a Linux expert. Things like adding a disk to the pool still need a lot of arcane cmd line magic, its not really for the end user. I hope this will be fixed when its no longer beta.


Greyhole is also based on the 1st version of DE so it still uses a landing zone - i.e. the designated disk mus have enough space for the file copy, it does not copy files to a target disk. Its a bit like cache disk in unRaid.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,165 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeveSSL /forum/post/19652903


Did you guys pay for the upgraded version of unRAID? Seems nice, but Grayhole on Amahi does the same thing for free.



Brandon


From the Amahi web site;


"Does Amahi support RAID?

Yes, you can use hardware RAID or software RAID with your Amahi server! "


There are all kinds of systems that give you that (figure it out yourself). So, Greyhole adds some kind of redundancy similar to WHS making duplicate data on different disks. But, have you read how to use Greyhole? Have you read the warnings? It runs at midnight? Relies on a SQL server? You write the file and then it is replaced by a link to the new file(s) Greyhole creates in your storage pool? Honestly, I start to read this and go WTF, can you make it any more difficult?


I mainly chose unRAID because of it's simplicity and the parity drive protection. A share is just the combination of like named top level directories on the disks. I can write to the share or to the directory on the disk interchangably. The parity provides live real-time protection against a failed disk. It's really all VERY simple and works VERY well.


The only other option besides unRAID for a parity was Flexraid with it's snapshot RAID. It wasn't very user friendly either at the time I purchased unRAID.


Peter
 
1 - 20 of 64 Posts
Top