NAS devices

  • Thread starter Thread starter Aidan Karley
  • Start date Start date
A

Aidan Karley

Would this be an appropriate NG for discussing NAS devices?
I'm considering whether to get a NAS device for the home
network, or maybe to build a low-power mini-ITX style device. In
particular I'm wondering about the comparative options for RAIDing
drives.
 
Aidan Karley said:
Would this be an appropriate NG for discussing NAS devices?
Yes.

I'm considering whether to get a NAS device for the home
network, or maybe to build a low-power mini-ITX style device.
Click to expand...

I'd go the second route myself.
In particular I'm wondering about the
comparative options for RAIDing drives.
Click to expand...

I'd run XP server on it and do it in software myself.

Others would likely use a linux and still do it in software.
 
I'd run XP server on it and do it in software myself.
Click to expand...
That would something-like double the cost of the system.
Besides, looking at something like a P3-533 or P3-800, XP is going to
be a bit creaky on it.
Others would likely use a linux and still do it in software.
Click to expand...
I've not done the figures in details, but using the Mrs's
desktop as a big-bastard file server when I'm in the country and using
my laptop, costs around £1.20~1.50 a day in additional electric bills.
That pulls something like 200W. I tried one of those NetGear SC-101
boxes from PC-World a couple of weeks ago but wouldn't have been able
to access it *directly* from my laptop when I have the Unix drive in it
for work. However, for running 2 drives and a lightweight processor it
was using a 35W PSU. So I reckon that payback time would be on the
order of 6 months to a year, if I can get the power consumption down to
(say) 60W, which is appropriate for a Mini-ITX system.
What I don't know (yet) is if PCI PATA RAID controllers are
particularly power thirsty.

Well, I'll see if the day shift on USENET have owt to say.
 
Fabien LE LEZ said:
If you just want the functionality of a NAS on standard PC hardware,
it might be better to choose a specific distribution, like
<http://www.freenas.org/> (well, OK, it's not Linux).
Click to expand...
This is one on my "to evaluate" list. I was just about to say
that my spare box doesn't have USB (antique? Hey, I liked that P3-266!
Nice system!), but I think I've got a PCI USB card floating around in
the gear pile somewhere. Whether the BIOS would support it is another
question.
Trying to run it on a CF device would tie up an IDE channel,
wouldn't it? I know that shouldn't be an issue if I configure the
machine for low-power consumption - 2 drives for mirroring and the
processor should fit under the 60W power range I'm targeting, but 4
drives would be pretty optimistic.

NASlite-USB is on the evaluation list too :
http://www.serverelements.com/naslite-2-usb.php
Click to expand...
That apparently bypasses the bios handling of the hard drive,
which I interpret to mean that an old mobo (e.g. the P3-266 referred to
above) might be able to handle the 250GB drive I picked up last time
the drive in the wife's machine filled up.
 
Aidan Karley said:
Rod Speed wrote
Click to expand...
That would something-like double the cost of the system.
Click to expand...

Only if you are silly enough to pay for the copy of XP.
Besides, looking at something like a P3-533
or P3-800, XP is going to be a bit creaky on it.
Click to expand...

Those will be fine. I ran it fine on a 400.

My 4 channel digital PVR is fine on a 900.
I've not done the figures in details, but using the Mrs's desktop
as a big-bastard file server when I'm in the country and using
my laptop, costs around £1.20~1.50 a day in additional electric
bills. That pulls something like 200W.
Click to expand...

I dont see that as anything to worry about myself, I have 2 systems on 24/7
I tried one of those NetGear SC-101 boxes from PC-World a couple of weeks ago
Click to expand...

I'd rather have the flexibility of a real PC myself.
but wouldn't have been able to access it *directly* from my laptop
when I have the Unix drive in it for work. However, for running 2
drives and a lightweight processor it was using a 35W PSU.
Click to expand...

That power question is more complicated and depends on how often
the NAS device is accessed and what you do about wake on lan etc.
So I reckon that payback time would be on the order of 6 months
to a year, if I can get the power consumption down to (say) 60W,
which is appropriate for a Mini-ITX system. What I don't know (yet)
is if PCI PATA RAID controllers are particularly power thirsty.
Click to expand...

They're nothing special.
 
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 01:46:21 +0100, Aidan Karley:

<[email protected]>:

[OT] Since your email address (and more specifically, the domain name)
is invalid, it'd be a good idea to add ".invalid" at the end.[/]

Trying to run it on a CF device would tie up an IDE channel,
wouldn't it?
Click to expand...

Note that the "one specific drive just for the system" prerequisite is
a drawback that could have been avoided.

I've set up a multi-RAID system (with the Linux distibution "Fedora")
on a PC with 4 SATA hard drives:
- one small RAID-1 partition on disks 1 and 2, for the system;
- one small RAID-1 partition on disks 3 and 4, for the swap;
- one huge RAID-5 partition on all four disks, for everything
else.

That way, the system will boot without the need of being aware of the
RAID configuration: it will consider the small partition on disk 1 as
a "normal" partition while booting. If disk 1 is dead, the BIOS will
automatically boot on disk 2, which has a system partition exactly the
same as on disk 1. And when the system isn't in "read-only mode" any
more, it's already aware of the RAID configuration.

Of course, Fedora is a multi-purpose distribution, so you need the
know some Linux basics, but my point is that it should be possible to
do the same with a specific distribution like Freenas.
OTOH, with that configuration, replacing the hard drives with bigger
ones might be a big tricky.
 
Would this be an appropriate NG for discussing NAS devices?
I'm considering whether to get a NAS device for the home
network, or maybe to build a low-power mini-ITX style device. In
particular I'm wondering about the comparative options for RAIDing
drives.
Click to expand...

If you go with the standalone device:

Several co-workers have recently recommended this Thecus unit after
running it for a while:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16833201004

And my neighbor's had good luck with the Buffalo Terastation.

I haven't run either one so far, so I can't vouch for them.
 
Seems a bit expensive for something that can only handle two SATA hard
drives.
Click to expand...

You can get cheaper standalone NAS devices, but you tend to trade off
features like RAID capability, Gb ethernet, and such.

My experience has been that you either pay a premium for a standalone
device with the capabilities you want, or you put together your own
with lots more flexibility in both configuration and time, but with a
larger footprint, more power consumption, and more management. I have
a couple of spare PCs, but my last few network drives have been
standalones due to space and time limitations.

I don't want more PCs to manage, especially not with an OS I don't
currently have experience with, so standalones fit the bill for me.
The price difference doesn't matter as much to me as the time spent
fiddling with it.

Just my preferences, of course - I know lots of people prefer putting
together samba boxes and such. You certainly gain more capability
that way.
 
Fabien LE LEZ said:
Seems a bit expensive for something that can only handle two SATA hard
drives.
Click to expand...
SATA would imply adding to the costs with new hard drives. To the
best of my knowledge I've not been in the same room as a SATA drive yet.
No, actually since I've walked into PC World regularly, I've must have
been. But I'm sure I've not picked one up in it's shipping box. Mind
you, it's nearly 3 years since I built a new computer too.
 
To the
best of my knowledge I've not been in the same room as a SATA drive yet.
Click to expand...

AFAIK, SATA drives offer two advantages:
1- They are hot-pluggable
2- A typical SATA controller can transfer data to/from four
disks at the same time; a typical PATA controller can only transfer
data to/from two disks at the same time, and only if they are on two
different cables.

So if you just have a PC with only one hard disk, PATA and SATA are
about the same.
 
Fabien LE LEZ said:
AFAIK, SATA drives offer two advantages:
1- They are hot-pluggable
2- A typical SATA controller can transfer data to/from four
disks at the same time; a typical PATA controller can only transfer
data to/from two disks at the same time, and only if they are on two
different cables.

So if you just have a PC with only one hard disk, PATA and SATA are
about the same.
Click to expand...

SATA drives have more future. We are already seeing some
motherboards with just one ATA channel, which would normally
have at least one optical drive on it in any normal use.
 
SATA drives have more future.
Click to expand...
Accepted. But that doesn't mean that I'll immediately throw the
8 or 10 PATA drives I've got around the house into the bucket. When/ if
I buy a complete new machine, then I'll consider it.
We are already seeing some
motherboards with just one ATA channel, which would normally
have at least one optical drive on it in any normal use.
Click to expand...
Not heard it myself, but I'm more or less out of the
box-building game at the moment.

Question - are laptops coming with SATA drives (and SATA
external connectors) yet? A laptop is likeliest to be my next complete
new box. (Or the Wife's to be more precise.)
 
Aidan Karley said:
Accepted. But that doesn't mean that I'll immediately throw the
8 or 10 PATA drives I've got around the house into the bucket. When/
if I buy a complete new machine, then I'll consider it.

Not heard it myself, but I'm more or less out of the
box-building game at the moment.
Click to expand...
Question - are laptops coming with SATA
drives (and SATA external connectors) yet?
Click to expand...

Havent noticed any, but then I dont bother with higher
end laptops, the very cheapys do all I need personally.
A laptop is likeliest to be my next complete
new box. (Or the Wife's to be more precise.)
Click to expand...

You can get eSATA cards for laptops.
 
Fabien LE LEZ said:
[OT] Since your email address (and more specifically, the domain name)
is invalid, it'd be a good idea to add ".invalid" at the end.[/]
Click to expand...
Is ".group" any more valid than ".invalid" ? <G> Either should
fail at the simplest of checking. What's the longest gTLD in use at the
moment? .info? And is that actually doing much more than providing homes
for spammers?

I've got some CD-burning to do this afternoon, and a blank drive
to put into the laptop. More questions will, I'm sure, follow.
 
Is ".group" any more valid than ".invalid" ?
Click to expand...

Well, you can be sure that ".invalid" will forever be reserved for
invalid domains (according to RFC2606, IANA has agreed to this).
And software can be written accordingly.

Also, AFAIK, if your domain name does not exist, a news server is
allowed to drop your posts, unless the domain name ends in ".invalid".
 
Well, you can be sure that ".invalid" will forever be reserved for
invalid domains (according to RFC2606, IANA has agreed to this).
And software can be written accordingly.
Click to expand...
Also, AFAIK, if your domain name does not exist, a news server is
allowed to drop your posts, unless the domain name ends in ".invalid".
Click to expand...

Interesting. Did not know that.

Arno
 
Interesting. Did not know that.
Click to expand...
Neither did I.
Unless you're talking about a news service with whom you have a
contract in existence, a news server can drop your posts for any reason at
all, or even, shock horror, refuse to transfer news messages from anyone
who isn't on their payroll. It would undermine the entire concept of
"news" and "USENET", but since many ISPs (apart from a small number of
paid-for specialist services) don't seem to find it an interesting service
(in comparison with advertising-rich web forums etc.), I'd expect that
more and more simply aren't going to bother configuring for the bandwidth.

My posts generally get through. Works for me.
 
Back
Top