|
evil_bunnY posted:Because no one uses it, so no one cares enough to fix it properly. What else are you supposed to use to access your files from windows boxes?
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 03:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 05:58 |
|
|
UndyingShadow posted:What else are you supposed to use to access your files from windows boxes?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 03:54
|
|
|
DrDork posted:You're not--you're supposed to live in the ideological purity that is *nix.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 11:37
|
|
|
Maniaman posted:I'm going to be setting a client up with a new Synology NAS. Problem being they have about 4 copies of a lot of their files spread across their current "server" (secretary's P4 desktop) and the 2 other computers in their organization. Is there any good software/methods out there to go through and merge/de-duplicate all of that? We just want 1 copy on the NAS, and to sync that to the different computers. SyncToy is surprisingly not terrible. Rsync can also be fantastic at this task if you're familiar with it, or Robocopy (GUI available on technet). Good choice on Synology. mcsuede fucked around with this message at 17:57 on Nov 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 17:47
|
|
|
joe944 posted:Yup, that seems to be the recommended method as opposed to a giant vdev. Gives you a much larger safety net. I actually tried a raidz3 setup with all 12 disks in it. I've read that IOPS may suffer, and the parity stripe may not be an optimal size or something. Performance seemed fine to me. It's loaded with "enterprise"-grade drives (hardware specs are what you'd see on top SAS/6Gb drives), and having 3 parity seems like an adequate safety net. bonnie++ benchmarks: two raidz2 vdevs in pool: Write: 352.87 MB/sec Read: 487.36 MB/sec single raidz3 vdev in pool: Write: 355.69 MB/sec Read: 443.75 MB/sec A quick dd write: # dd bs=1M count=10240 if=/dev/zero of=/zfs/derp.test Write: 673.62 MB/sec
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 18:37
|
|
|
Xenomorph posted:I actually tried a raidz3 setup with all 12 disks in it. I've read that IOPS may suffer, and the parity stripe may not be an optimal size or something. Performance seemed fine to me. It's loaded with "enterprise"-grade drives (hardware specs are what you'd see on top SAS/6Gb drives), and having 3 parity seems like an adequate safety net. My zpool is raidz1 8x WD Black 2TB drives and I seem to recall my bonnie benchmarks using a 16GB test were around 560MB/s read and 400MB/s write. Using an LSI 1068e based pci-e 4x card as my interface. What kind of drives are you using and what interface(s) are they on?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 19:53
|
|
|
UndyingShadow posted:What else are you supposed to use to access your files from windows boxes? Vista and 7 (and probably 8) come with an NFS client, but you need to activate it under Control Panel\Programs\Programs and Features\Turn Windows Features On or Off. I think MS offers a downloadable NFS client for XP as well.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 19:57
|
|
|
That NFS client is horrible and buggy as hell in my experience. Files will randomly throw IO errors, permissions are wonky, etc
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 20:10
|
|
|
The_Franz posted:Vista and 7 (and probably 8) come with an NFS client, but you need to activate it under Control Panel\Programs\Programs and Features\Turn Windows Features On or Off. Note that this is not available with all versions of Windows 7.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 20:11
|
|
|
titaniumone posted:My zpool is raidz1 8x WD Black 2TB drives and I seem to recall my bonnie benchmarks using a 16GB test were around 560MB/s read and 400MB/s write. Using an LSI 1068e based pci-e 4x card as my interface. bonnie++ made me use 2x my RAM to test, so I used a 128GB file (yeah, 64GB RAM). I have the controller written down somewhere. It's LSI-based, sold as a Dell H710p (1GB of NVRAM). The 12 drives are Seagate Constellation ES.2, "Enterprise" SATA/7.2K. raidz1 with 8x 2TB drives? Why not raidz2?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 22:21
|
|
|
Xenomorph posted:bonnie++ made me use 2x my RAM to test, so I used a 128GB file (yeah, 64GB RAM). Well your system is a monster, so no idea there then. My pool is full of stuff I can easily replace, and my backups, so worst case if I lose the array it's just an inconvenience.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 01:06
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Or windows box at the other end. wtf is windows
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 04:05
|
|
|
It's where we watch our porn.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 04:20
|
|
|
I'm hoping y'all will excuse some dumb questions because I have some trouble wrapping my head around all this RAID stuff. I have this old motherboard which supposedly has on-board RAID. It has four SATA slots. I'm getting tired of the old, slow, non-RAIDed disks I have and want to upgrade. I'm really pretty paranoid about my data disappearing, so I want to build a RAID1 array of two new 2TB disks, and keep my operating systems (Debian Squeeze and Windows*) on an SSD. The plan is as follows: 1 × Samsung 830 128 GB SSD, both operating systems go on this 2 × Seagate Barracuda 7200RPM 2TB disks in RAID1, all my poo poo goes on these, divided between various NTFS and ext3 partitions So: will this motherboard allow me to seamlessly use a RAID1 setup with both Windows and Debian? The manual for the board tells me nothing.  Will it require any esoteric drivers or anything or do I just set it up in BIOS setup and go? Is there any reason I should not go with the motherboard RAID and instead buy a separate RAID controller card or even use a pure software solution? I did read the OP and selected parts of the thread, but I'm still not sure what the possible implications of a "soft-hard" RAID setup are for a multi-OS setup.* If the Windows version is relevant, I've been using XP Pro for ages but I might very well upgrade to 7 when I do this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 22:16
|
|
|
regenwetter posted:Is there any reason I should not go with the motherboard RAID and instead buy a separate RAID controller card or even use a pure software solution? I can't answer your other questions, but I decided to go with software raid because I do not want to be beholden to vendor lock in. Performance is not an issue in my case.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 22:40
|
|
|
I'm getting really frustrated by a ZFS project and there seem to be a lot more ZFS users here than in the Enterprise Storage thread. I started with NAS4FREE 9.1.0.1 (BSD Stable/9 based) and had stability problems where the entire system would go unresponsive. Based on some correspondence with other Stable/9 users seeing the same problem, I moved to the Stable/8-based just-released FREENAS 8.3. Stability problems are fixed -- system has been up 8 days, and both local disk performance and NFS performance to a linux client is outstanding. However, write performance on both NFS to windows and iscsi to windows is horrible under FreeNAS. Here's what I'm looking at over 10gbit iscsi:  Obviously one of these is going to be fine as a target for disk backups, and the other one is not. Any suggestions? Do I need to go with an installable freebsd 8 so I can update istgt? Are there tweaks that NAS4Free implements that FreeNAS does not? Is my ZIL on my imported pool maybe not working? Should I just buy Nexenta so this is someone else's problem? The system is a SuperMicro SC847, 2x E5620, 96 GB RAM, 10gbit Intel x520-DA2 NIC, 32x ST3000DM001 3TB, and a ZeusRAM for ZIL. The pool config: code:KS fucked around with this message at 00:55 on Nov 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 00:51
|
|
|
My gut feeling is that if you've spend enough money to go 10gige plus all those drives and the ramdrive, you can certainly pay someone to support it for you. Why not contact iXsystems and see if they'll sell you support for FreeNAS (or a license for TrueNAS)? They seem like good people.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 02:14
|
|
|
Yeah, if you're doing ZFS for business (I presume that anyone doing 10G ethernet = business) you're kind of in your own business niche stuck between SMB solutions and expensive SAS expanders on DAS architectures or pricey SANs. I think most of us doing ZFS in here kinda stop at performance optimizations and scalability beyond around 200MBps throughput and 20 drives. You're probably best shouting out to the ZFS mailing list to reach out to all the other people using it in professional environments. PS. That setup looks suspiciously close to what Anandtech's team built for their servers. Perhaps there's value in popping onto their forums as well if you want to stick to web forums?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 02:24
|
|
|
So what are my other options besides the HP N40L? It's been out for a while, is there a new version coming? Can I build something myself that's fanless, faster than an Atom, and has a similar sized case/similar price point?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 02:45
|
|
|
Ninja Rope posted:So what are my other options besides the HP N40L? It's been out for a while, is there a new version coming? Can I build something myself that's fanless, faster than an Atom, and has a similar sized case/similar price point? You're still going to want to plunk down some cash for 8-16GB of RAM and an Intel Pro NIC, but that'd be the case with the N40L, as well. You could probably do it even cheaper on AMD's side of the house (the N40L actually uses a Turion, rather than an Atom), but I don't know enough about their low-end CPUs to give you a real suggestion. People don't buy the N40L because it's the absolute best price:performance pick. They buy it because it's plenty fast for what it's supposed to do (be a NAS and run some minor other services like torrents), it's tiny, it's well built, and it's really convenient (both to use, and to recommend). You can also look at other pre-rolled NAS solutions, like Synology, but they're are going to be a LOT more expensive. DrDork fucked around with this message at 07:50 on Nov 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 07:43
|
|
|
HP noted that they'll be taking the Microserver more seriously a bit ago. Knowing HP, I suspect this means they'll be trying to bundle some crapware on there to offset losses and more "value add" that'll be applicable for basically 0% of the people buying one. Great little piece of engineering likely to be marred by MBAs. One thing I've learned over the years in big bullshit companies in trouble is that newly made products that users love that catch on tend to be destroyed quickly by an army of business development and product management battles ruining whatever appeal it had. I feel sorry for the engineers that worked on this, they clearly cared enough to do this well (the one weird thing being the crippling of the other SATA port for no obvious reason, perhaps because of certain optical drive configurations). There's some batting about internally it seems for an update - the next time potentially with Intel chips using Atom (newer Atoms are improving rapidly) rather than AMD because of a broader enterprise effort to go after datacenters. http://www.wegotserved.com/2011/12/21/hp-planning-powerful-proliant-microserver/ http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2406053,00.asp Anyway, if you want to find something other than the Microserver, the rest are bundled with Windows in some manner but there's the Acer EasyStore. Unfortunately, they're all out of stock at Newegg and discontinued, so my suspicion is that they sold poorly and Acer's backed out. The primary advantage to me is that for about the same cost as building most of this myself, I get something far more power and usability efficient. You try adding a hotswap cage to your random cheapo ITX case. If you've got that Chenbro, can you fit in a couple more drives? How about a USB boot drive on the motherboard? How efficient is a 300w PSU going to be when it's at 25w or even 50w idle? I've been building machines for over a decade now out of being cost-effective but I had to yield to the Microserver for moderate home storage needs. I have a separate 10-disk NAS that's obviously way larger, but it also took a lot more time to get the right SATA backplane and SAS card.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 14:35
|
|
|
2TB WD Reds for $109 shipped. Max 5, but if you need drives to fill something, get 'em while they're hot!
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 18:40
|
|
|
Anybody have an experience with the performance hit I might encounter with using a 2500k (so non VT-D) with my 9220-8i based cards in ESXi5 (passing through to a FreeNAS VM)? My plan was to upgrade my desktop computer that has a 2500k and give that proc to my new server. If VT-D is crucial I guess I might keep the desktop processor the same and buy a different VT-D supporting proc for the server.
Fatal fucked around with this message at 20:07 on Nov 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 20:04
|
|
|
Is your NAS VM disks thin or thick eager zero provisioned?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 20:16
|
|
|
I guess the HP is the best way to go, I'm just annoyed the CPU doesn't support all the VT and AES extensions I'm used to and would probably use. But maybe not heavily enough to really miss them. Also I've heard of people getting it for < $300 but I haven't seen it less than $320 lately. I spoke to the lead developer for FreeNAS and he complained that Atom CPUs weren't really fast enough to do ZFS over GigE and said an i3 is much better. Seems like the N40L falls right between the two?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 23:24
|
|
|
Yeah, the N40L isn't really intended to do any heavy lifting or anything fancy, like VM's--it's just supposed to serve files and run some other light utilities. It's true that the current batch of Atoms is pretty slow (and their power-use isn't even that low compared to some of the i3s), but you have to consider the price: the cheapest i3 is still over $100, for which price you can get an Atom AND a motherboard. The N40L has enough CPU to keep up with ZFS (though if you're pushing it through Samba/CIFS you're gonna get lovely speeds anyhow) easily--it's more a question of putting enough RAM in there. An i3 would be overkill for the concept that a N40L tries to hit, but would certainly be a better choice for a more general-purpose server that handled multiple VM's and other responsibilities (routing, webserver, etc) in addition to just serving up delicious files.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 23:32
|
|
|
I really want to use CIFS though. Is there anything that can be done about that? It can't all be CPU bound? Edit: All Windows clients will be Windows 7.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2012 00:41
|
|
|
It's not even really an issue of being CPU bound--the CIFS implementation in FreeBSD (on which FreeNAS and NAS4Free are based) and Solaris just straight up is slow. Throwing more CPU at it doesn't really help all that much. Though, to be fair, by "slow" I mean that I routinely get ~45MB/s on extended operations, and smaller writes will go 100MB/s until I fill the buffers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2012 00:55
|
|
|
Edit: Just saw someone posted the $109 drives above.. my bad. Anyways, I was talking about my ZFS build earlier and now I have the drives to complete it! I'll post up some pics when I get the drives. Max of 5 sucks.. I had to order one from Amazon. 
joe944 fucked around with this message at 01:22 on Nov 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2012 01:17
|
|
|
Fatal posted:Anybody have an experience with the performance hit I might encounter with using a 2500k (so non VT-D) with my 9220-8i based cards in ESXi5 (passing through to a FreeNAS VM)? My plan was to upgrade my desktop computer that has a 2500k and give that proc to my new server. If VT-D is crucial I guess I might keep the desktop processor the same and buy a different VT-D supporting proc for the server. I can't say I ever benchmarked with/without VT-D on my setup but I wouldn't want to try and pass through drives to a VM without it. It's pretty nice to have things set up in a ESXi environment, and yet have the storage box still have direct access to the controller. I'd bet you could pretty easily trade across for a non-K processor anyway. For what it's worth, I do think Intel are dickbags for being picky as gently caress about what CPUs support VT-d, even though it's a feature managed entirely by the chipset.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2012 01:25
|
|
|
joe944 posted:Edit: Just saw someone posted the $109 drives above.. my bad. I just bought some from newegg and some from Amazon both for $110 each. The first time I hit the page Amazon had them for $120 but they lowered it by the time I was ready to buy. Edit: If it hasn't shipped yet cancel and re-order at $110?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2012 01:31
|
|
|
Ninja Rope posted:I just bought some from newegg and some from Amazon both for $110 each. The first time I hit the page Amazon had them for $120 but they lowered it by the time I was ready to buy. Wow. Good call. Cancelled just in time I hope. Prices on the 3TB just jumped up $10 too. E: Got the cancellation confirmation. Needed to get a new UPS anyways so it was convenient to delay the order. I placed it over 3 hours ago, surprised it hadn't shipped out already. They likely would have hooked me up with a price check regardless, Newegg has done that for me in the past. joe944 fucked around with this message at 02:36 on Nov 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2012 02:27
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:I can't say I ever benchmarked with/without VT-D on my setup but I wouldn't want to try and pass through drives to a VM without it. It's pretty nice to have things set up in a ESXi environment, and yet have the storage box still have direct access to the controller. I'd bet you could pretty easily trade across for a non-K processor anyway. Yeah, I think I'm just going to go with a 3550 and save the desktop upgrade for later. The 2500k has been doing fine for the past year and had no real reason to swap it out, just seemed convenient.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2012 04:38
|
|
|
DrDork posted:It's not even really an issue of being CPU bound--the CIFS implementation in FreeBSD (on which FreeNAS and NAS4Free are based) and Solaris just straight up is slow. Throwing more CPU at it doesn't really help all that much. Though, to be fair, by "slow" I mean that I routinely get ~45MB/s on extended operations, and smaller writes will go 100MB/s until I fill the buffers. How are you testing this? With FreeBSD 9.1 & Samba 3.6.9, copying files from that to my Windows system (with a *very* fast SSD) was hitting ~113MB/sec (reported by both Windows and FreeBSD). Windows Task Manager said its NIC was at 99% utilization, so I figured FreeBSD/Samba was *not* the bottleneck. I was moving 10GB and 20GB files back and forth, so these were long, sustained transfers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2012 09:03
|
|
|
So I ordered an N40L and a bunch of drives. If this doesn't work out I am going to be full of such impotent goon rage at this thread. But I'm sure it will be fine. Incidentally, forum threads show enabling AIO (via loading the kernel module and building samba with that option) on FreeBSD helps a lot with samba/CIFS performance. Anyone having trouble give that a try?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2012 09:22
|
|
|
Xenomorph posted:How are you testing this? With FreeBSD 9.1 & Samba 3.6.9, copying files from that to my Windows system (with a *very* fast SSD) was hitting ~113MB/sec (reported by both Windows and FreeBSD). Windows Task Manager said its NIC was at 99% utilization, so I figured FreeBSD/Samba was *not* the bottleneck. Ninja Rope posted:But I'm sure it will be fine. Incidentally, forum threads show enabling AIO (via loading the kernel module and building samba with that option) on FreeBSD helps a lot with samba/CIFS performance. Anyone having trouble give that a try?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2012 15:38
|
|
|
Ninja Rope posted:So I ordered an N40L and a bunch of drives. If this doesn't work out I am going to be full of such impotent goon rage at this thread. I'm pretty sure more than half of the posters in this thread use a microserver for the exact same purposes as you, so I doubt you will have any problems.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2012 18:51
|
|
|
DrDork posted:Its performance is actually pretty good with ZFS, all things considered. As long as you load it up with 8GB (16GB if you're feeling so inclined) of RAM, and drop in some variety of Intel Pro NIC, it won't be the N40L hardware holding you back. One of these NICs? Any suggestion as to PCI-Express vs PCI? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833106036 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833106122
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2012 02:08
|
|
|
I have http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833106036 in my miroserver. It works perfectly with ZFS and with Server2012. Get it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2012 02:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 05:58 |
|
|
rekamso posted:One of these NICs? Any suggestion as to PCI-Express vs PCI? As for PCIe vs PCI, always favor PCIe unless you literally have no slots left. Not sure what you're planning on putting it into, but if it's a N40L be aware that it only has PCIe slots.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2012 03:02
|
|