to raid or not

[Skirge01]

Originally Posted by toony

Just curious if I want to make the switch to WHS and flexraid to use parity do I have to clear my drives off or can it set up the raid as long as it has one free drive?

Nope. You just tell it what drives you want parity for and it runs the calculations, putting it on your dedicated parity drive, which is not part of the WHS drive pool. I had 5 drives (1x500GB, 3x1TB) of data (not full, mind you) and just set up FlexRAID to write the parity to another 1TB drive. With the FlexRAID WebUI, you can even set it up to automatically recalculate the parity on some interval. Mine's set for once a day, early in the morning.

If you're growing by TB's every few months, I'd probably suggest two parity drives in the near future, so you're covered if one of the parity drives fail. Once I hit the 8TB mark, I'll be doing the same. My reasoning is that by then, I'll have quite a few Blu-Ray rips on the WHS box and I won't feel like re-ripping them if a data drive and my parity drive fail!

[Skirge01]

Originally Posted by S_M_E

Also, the port replicators will allow you to add a lot of drives but they share the bw of one port. You might be better off adding a cheap multi-port PCI/PCI-e card to add ports if performance is more important than space.

S_M_E brings up a good point here and I did a TON of research on this potential issue. Bandwidth would certainly be shared among the ports, but realistically, you probably will never even get close to hitting that 300MB/s max (SATA 3Gb/s)in a home situation. Each HD stream is only 2-3MB/s (see here), so you have quite a bit of breathing room, even with multiple drives on a single port. I believe the 2-3MB/s second is based on the fact that US broadcasters currently are allotted 19.3Mb/s of bandwidth for their HD programming. That calculates out to just 2.4125MB/s.

[S_M_E]

Indeed. A 5 port replicator will share 60M per drive assuming all drives are maxed. Performance may not be an issue but the potential is there. Cost is another factor, you can find ports cheaper on a card, assuming you don't need dozens of ports. Two 4 or 8 port cards added to a mainboard with 6-8 ports already is a lot of ports. 2 or 3 replicators will probably set you back more. Since with WHS and/or flexraid a drive failure isn't that big of a deal, I'd still suggest fewer larger drives than many smaller drives. I doubt many people would need more than 8-12 drives, assuming they used larger drives and if they outgrew those drives they could be replaced with even larger drive in time. right now 1.5T is large but in a year it might not be. 8x1.5T= 12T, that's a lot of space although that wouldn't include parity or duplication depending on which solution was used.

[toony]

Right now I have all 4 sata slots used, I have a pci expansion card to give me another 4 drives which should do me to the end of this year... I hope.

At that point I will look into port replication or a mobo with more pci slots.

I am going to look further into WHS and play with it for a bit before I do a switch from XP, I am going to read your tutorial on it.

I really appreciate this, I think I will have to read up on flexraid and the workings of WHS quit a bit.

Thanks!

Toony

[toony]

Forgot to ask, I assume that anything XP can run so can WHS?

I am planing on installing a security camera system on my house and at some point have WHS Sage and the security software working in harmony... it's a pipe dream I'm sure.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by toony

Forgot to ask, I assume that anything XP can run so can WHS?

I am planing on installing a security camera system on my house and at some point have WHS Sage and the security software working in harmony... it's a pipe dream I'm sure.

I don't know about "anything" exactly, but mostly I'd say. Win2k3 drivers are always preferred (especially for storage drivers) and often harder to find. That said, I've used XP drivers successfully too. My PVR cards don't have win2k3 specific drivers, for example, but they work.

[Skirge01]

I took quite a bit of time before deciding on my server hardware. In the end, I chose the Supermicro X7DWE and added the Supermicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 PCI-X card, which added 8 SATA ports. For the record, I am not using the port multipliers on any of the PCI-X ports, due to the potential for hitting the 1067MB/s bandwidth limit for PCI-X @ 133MHz. While it's still unlikely, I don't want to push it.

As S_M_E said, the XP drivers "generally" work, but the 2K3 ones would certainly be preferred. For example, the HD-PVR software was a bit of a pain to install on WHS for me, but it did work after several uninstalls/reinstalls of different driver versions.

[kbyrd]

Originally Posted by toony

Right now I have all 4 sata slots used, I have a pci expansion card to give me another 4 drives which should do me to the end of this year... I hope.

I'm doing RAID5 on Linux, using the built in md driver so I don't need raid cards, just ports. When I went looking, I had trouble finding a cheap 4-port PCI or PCIe card. If the card does RAID, that's fine. I just don't want to pay RAID card prices. Any help?

There's a bandwidth issue with with >2 port PCI and PCIe cards as well. Standard PCI slots have 133MB/s of bandwidth, Four drives each pushing 50MB/s would be limited by the card. IIRC, more than 2 ports usually means a PCI-X card, which means a server motherboard. PCIe x1 is better, either 250MB/s or 500MB/s of bandwidth depending on whether the slot and the card are PCIe v1.1 or v2.0.

I just haven't seen a low cost 4 internal SATA port PCI or PCIe. I have seen a few 2 port internal, 2 port eSATA, but that's not quite it.

[Skirge01]

Originally Posted by kbyrd

There's a bandwidth issue with with >2 port PCI and PCIe cards as well. Standard PCI slots have 133MB/s of bandwidth, Four drives each pushing 50MB/s would be limited by the card. IIRC, more than 2 ports usually means a PCI-X card, which means a server motherboard. PCIe x1 is better, either 250MB/s or 500MB/s of bandwidth depending on whether the slot and the card are PCIe v1.1 or v2.0.

In most cases, a home user will never saturate the bus. Using RAID5, you certainly have the potential to hit the limit, since all drives are usually being written to simultaneously. Is 50MB/s a sustained rate you've seen your array hit? But, WHS doesn't officially support RAID and this discussion has headed toward WHS. In general, WHS also only writes to one drive at a time. (Not counting the system drive being utilized or drive balancing.) I just don't want the OP to get the wrong message regarding where he seems to be heading.

I'm doing RAID5 on Linux, using the built in md driver so I don't need raid cards, just ports. When I went looking, I had trouble finding a cheap 4-port PCI or PCIe card. If the card does RAID, that's fine. I just don't want to pay RAID card prices. Any help?

You're absolutely correct. I had difficulty finding them as well, which is precisely why I went with a single PCI-X slot on my mobo. Beyond that, I'm looking at only 2 or 4 additional ports per PCI-e slot and then using port multipliers to expand further.

[bastafidli]

I have added 4 ports on my Linux server using this card

http://www.promise.com/product/produ...product_id=139

and it works like a charn. You can find it for about $50 so it is not a bad deal.

[CarlR]

Originally Posted by kbyrd

I'm doing RAID5 on Linux, using the built in md driver so I don't need raid cards, just ports. When I went looking, I had trouble finding a cheap 4-port PCI or PCIe card. If the card does RAID, that's fine. I just don't want to pay RAID card prices. Any help?

There's a bandwidth issue with with >2 port PCI and PCIe cards as well. Standard PCI slots have 133MB/s of bandwidth, Four drives each pushing 50MB/s would be limited by the card. IIRC, more than 2 ports usually means a PCI-X card, which means a server motherboard. PCIe x1 is better, either 250MB/s or 500MB/s of bandwidth depending on whether the slot and the card are PCIe v1.1 or v2.0.

I just haven't seen a low cost 4 internal SATA port PCI or PCIe. I have seen a few 2 port internal, 2 port eSATA, but that's not quite it.

This will do 4 internal SATA I (1.5Gb/s) ports on the PCI bus. There are bottleneck concerns as you mention, but realistically do you need to support all 4 drives running flat out at the same time? I have one of these in my server that I use for my 4 backup (scheduled mirror) drives, so bandwidth is not a big issue for me.

The cheapest 4-port PCIe cards I've seen run around $100, but they will do SATAII.

[S_M_E]

Check pricewatch.com for SATAII cards too. The 4-8 port cards might also support RAID but you can just use the ports if you want and you'll get an idea of the prices and options available.

[toony]

I'm deffinetly not going the NAS / raid route, I have made my mind up on WHS and Flexraid.

But these things are never easy. I'm not a complete newb at this, just it's not my main focus in life. Though it used to be... anyone remeber the good old AS400 days? I think they are still out there.... I digress....

I am going to upgrade the server, new mobo and proc. I like Asus and MSI I think I am going to head towards a quad core, I know it's not neccessary but at the very least stick with a duo core.

Question is now PCIe or PCI-x checked out some info wiki has a good article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCI-X
Kinda looks like pci-e is the better option, My server case allows for a large format board so I'm going to do some hardware research. Of course I want to keep costs reasonable.

[S_M_E]

Before buying the mobo, check their support site for win2k3 storage/chipset/etc drivers, if they don't exist, keep looking.

BTW: I remember the AS400, my first computer was a Timex Sinclaire in 1982, not that you could call that much of a computer by today's standards.

[Skirge01]

Originally Posted by toony

Question is now PCIe or PCI-x checked out some info wiki has a good article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCI-X
Kinda looks like pci-e is the better option, My server case allows for a large format board so I'm going to do some hardware research. Of course I want to keep costs reasonable.

PCI-e is the better option when it comes to bandwidth, but you'll find that if you want more than 4 ports on a single card, you're going to find that you're looking at expensive RAID cards where you aren't going to use the RAID feature. This was why I went with a mobo that had a single PCI-X slot and then also had tons of PCI-e slots. (BTW, the PCI-X bus shares it's bandwidth with any other PCI-X slots, which is why I only wanted a single PCI-X slot.) The PCI-X got me 8 additional ports right off the bat and kept my PCI-e slots free initially.

Add a 4 port SATA card (try StarTech or Adaptec), plus an Addonics 5x1 port multiplier ($80) and you get 5 additional ports for around $200. That gives you 8 ports. Then, just keep adding 5x1's to the SATA card as you need more. Just ensure the 4 port SATA card you choose supports port multiplier technology. You could very easily skip the PCI-X card ($100) if you wanted, so long as you have enough PCI-e slots for your needs.

[kbyrd]

Originally Posted by bastafidli

I have added 4 ports on my Linux server using this card

http://www.promise.com/product/produ...product_id=139

and it works like a charn. You can find it for about $50 so it is not a bad deal.

I was hoping for PCIe, but I guess 133MBps is fine and I do have a single PCI slot.

Originally Posted by CarlR

This will do 4 internal SATA I (1.5Gb/s) ports on the PCI bus. There are bottleneck concerns as you mention, but realistically do you need to support all 4 drives running flat out at the same time? I have one of these in my server that I use for my 4 backup (scheduled mirror) drives, so bandwidth is not a big issue for me.

The cheapest 4-port PCIe cards I've seen run around $100, but they will do SATAII.

Those only 4-port PCIe cards I've seen are x4 PCIe, and x4 slots on motherboards are about as rare as PCI-X. Although, I just realized I have a x16 PCIe slot. Man, I'm an idiot. That will totally work.

Originally Posted by Skirge01

PCI-e is the better option when it comes to bandwidth, but you'll find that if you want more than 4 ports on a single card, you're going to find that you're looking at expensive RAID cards where you aren't going to use the RAID feature. This was why I went with a mobo that had a single PCI-X slot and then also had tons of PCI-e slots. (BTW, the PCI-X bus shares it's bandwidth with any other PCI-X slots, which is why I only wanted a single PCI-X slot.) The PCI-X got me 8 additional ports right off the bat and kept my PCI-e slots free initially.

Add a 4 port SATA card (try StarTech or Adaptec), plus an Addonics 5x1 port multiplier ($80) and you get 5 additional ports for around $200. That gives you 8 ports. Then, just keep adding 5x1's to the SATA card as you need more. Just ensure the 4 port SATA card you choose supports port multiplier technology. You could very easily skip the PCI-X card ($100) if you wanted, so long as you have enough PCI-e slots for your needs.

Yea, I didn't try looking for a PCI-X mobo, that usually means an expensive server mobo. I just went with what I had. I've got 5 ports on the mobo now, it really does look like the cheapest option is the addonics PM.

Oh, and to Skirge01 who asked about hitting 50MB/s while pointing out that I highjacked this thread away from WHS and towards software raid:
1) A 6-7 drive RAID5 array can do 200MB/s, It's easy.

2) You're right, I threadjacked. I'm sorry about that. That was rude.

Back to WHS and actually answering the OP's questions.

[ThePaladinTech]

Somewhere someone mentioned 'these boxes costs a lot certainly I can do it cheaper' ... right now I have my archived files on an infrant ready-nas NV+ (now owned by netgear) ... but I am really considering this in the future:

http://lime-technology.com/

The software can be purchased for $130 ... and the raid can take advantage of dis-similar sized disks ... it was designed with media content in mind.

[toony]

There is an interesting thread here on UnRain vs FlexRaid http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=1785.0

I was the OP on that build it cheaper post. It looks interesting and what they were talking about that Flexraid needs to rebuild the parity files for every change such as deleating a file? I understand that the parity would need to be changed but it sounds like Flexraid does not do this on the fly and UnRaid does. This must be what Skirge01 was talking about when he said "automatically recalculate the parity on some interval. Mine's set for once a day, early in the morning."

I guess that's not a huge deal though. But these guys in that thread really seem to like UnRaid, yes it costs $130 per 16 drives but maybe there is a reason... going to keep reading.

Skirge01, What mobo did you go with ?

[toony]

Just wanted to say this thread has officially hurt my brain.

11 hours at work, 1 hour watching Peep Show (wicked Britcom) and a couple hours reading (not consecutivley) about this...

'Till tomorrow! I bid you adieu.

Thanks again, great thread!

[Skirge01]

Originally Posted by kbyrd

Yea, I didn't try looking for a PCI-X mobo, that usually means an expensive server mobo. I just went with what I had. I've got 5 ports on the mobo now, it really does look like the cheapest option is the addonics PM.

Definitely can't argue the price for the mobo. I paid over $300 for my X7DWE. But, I wanted something that was built to run 24/7 year over year.

Oh, and to Skirge01 who asked about hitting 50MB/s while pointing out that I highjacked this thread away from WHS and towards software raid:
1) A 6-7 drive RAID5 array can do 200MB/s, It's easy.

Absolutely, and I think I even agreed with that assessment. I was just curious if you had any hard numbers, which is seems you do. Thanks for that!

2) You're right, I threadjacked. I'm sorry about that. That was rude.

Back to WHS and actually answering the OP's questions.

Not at all. I tried to steer it back towards the OP's topic only to avoid confusion, but I didn't mean to come off as though you weren't welcome with your comments. I reworded my response about 4 times before submitting. I'm sure the discussion will only help the OP, anyway. The more info the better, so long as we don't confuse.