|
Mantle posted:I've successfully RMA'd drives with intermittent errors before and had the replacement drive cross shipped to me for minimal downtime. They sent me a slightly larger drive but nothing significant and I still had to pay for shipping back so I don't think the OEM was concerned about me "gaming" the system. I think it was WD or Seagate drive. Cool, I'll just send it off as it is then
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2013 09:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 08:29 |
|
|
My 10Tb WHSv1 NAS is almost full, so I'm looking to build a new NAS(probably with WHS2011+Drivepool), and am looking at WD 4TB Red drives. This is probably a retarded question, but the blurb for the drives says they're for 1-5 bay NAS systems. Is there any particular reason I couldn't put six to eight of these drives into a NAS I build myself? Incidentally, I'd start off with four, plus a system drive, so I can expand later as needed, and when the price will have come down. AU$253 each ain't cheap. modeski fucked around with this message at 07:26 on Sep 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 07:24
|
|
|
No, there's no reason whatsoever but as the number of disks increases the MTBF-to-RAIDarray-rebuild-time-ratio falls - so you can run into a situation where you're rebuilding your array and a secondary disk crashes whereupon you'll have to restore from backup.
BlankSystemDaemon fucked around with this message at 07:44 on Sep 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 07:39
|
|
|
D. Ebdrup posted:No, there's no reason whatsoever but as the number of disks increases the MTBF-to-RAIDarray-rebuild-time-ratio falls - so you can run into a situation where you're rebuilding your array and a secondary disk crashes whereupon you'll have to restore from backup. Great, thanks. I'll bear that in mind.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 08:01
|
|
|
Am I missing something in FreeNAS? I'm using 9.1.1 as a stop-gap until a Synology box arrives, with one volume and a simple CIFS share. Any new folders I create have read permissions granted to the Everyone group, whether I do the creating on the Windows client or in a command line on the box itself. Even if I remove all mention of Everyone from a folders permissions and disable inheritance, anything I created in that folder has read access granted to Everyone. The root of the volume has read attributes and permissions enabled for Everyone, applied to the single folder only. The new folder permissions are showing as inheriting their permissions from nowhere, it just seems somewhere in FreeNAS the Everyone group is set to see everything. Guest access is turned off, volume permissions are 750 with the owner user as root and owner group as wheel. Thanks Ants fucked around with this message at 01:08 on Sep 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 01:05
|
|
|
modeski posted:My 10Tb WHSv1 NAS is almost full, so I'm looking to build a new NAS(probably with WHS2011+Drivepool), and am looking at WD 4TB Red drives. This is probably a retarded question, but the blurb for the drives says they're for 1-5 bay NAS systems. Is there any particular reason I couldn't put six to eight of these drives into a NAS I build myself? I set a friend up with server 2012 essentials + Drivepool+snapraid (newer whs more or less). The setup works pretty good as he has a bunch of different size drives and you can just add more drives as you please. I would suggest snapraid if your library is mostly static as it is pretty easy to use and can rebuild one (or two) bad drives.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 14:37
|
|
|
Does anyone have an opinion on the Toshiba PH3300U-1I72 3TB drive? It's one of Shell Shockers at NewEgg today. At $40 less than a 3TB WD Red with a similar 3-year warranty, it seems like a great deal. I'm thinking of purchasing getting a couple for my UnRaid setup.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 17:15
|
|
|
parsleyc posted:Does anyone have an opinion on the Toshiba PH3300U-1I72 3TB drive? They had combos this morning for the same drive plus a 16 or 32GB flash drive for 92/95 shipped. I nabbed 4 of them, so I guess I'll see  The slickdeals thread on it said they are Hitachi drives that are just rebadged. It is slickdeals, so take that for what it is. If true, I have had 4 Hitachi 2TB drives running fine in a software RAID5 array since March 2011 with no failures or SMART errors. I was going to give a heads up to this thread about the deal, but they deleted the combos about 2 minutes after my order. I still think 99 is a reasonable price, especially with a 3 year warranty on it these days. Tigerdirect had these on sale for 90 after rebate a few days ago. Hopefully we'll see more deals at this price point in the future.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 17:40
|
|
|
parsleyc posted:Does anyone have an opinion on the Toshiba PH3300U-1I72 3TB drive?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 17:52
|
|
|
ilkhan posted:Its $5 less than a RED drive from amazon, and a 4TB RED from amazon is $202... Unless you are seeing something I didn't/don't, the $105 RED on Amazon is 2TB... http://www.amazon.com/WD-Red-NAS-Hard-Drive/dp/B008JJLW4M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1379350497
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 17:56
|
|
|
ilkhan posted:Its $5 less than a RED drive from amazon, and a 4TB RED from amazon is $202... The 3TB Red on Amazon is $139.99. I was comparing a like-sized drive to a like-sized drive. You got my hopes up for a second. Fancy_Lad posted:The slickdeals thread on it said they are Hitachi drives that are just rebadged. It is slickdeals, so take that for what it is. If true, I have had 4 Hitachi 2TB drives running fine in a software RAID5 array since March 2011 with no failures or SMART errors. I also heard it was a Hitachi drive. Don't know how the quality compares to WD's Reds, but I'm going to pull the trigger on these. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 17:58
|
|
|
Fancy_Lad posted:Unless you are seeing something I didn't/don't, the $105 RED on Amazon is 2TB...
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 18:10
|
|
|
Vanilla posted:Thanks for the info, I think i'll load ESXi.... I like the Sandisk Cruzer Fit series for embedded stuff like this. They're not much bigger than the USB connector itself, so even plugged into the back they don't stick out far enough that you need to worry about something catching on it and damaging the drive/jack.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 18:20
|
|
|
parsleyc posted:Does anyone have an opinion on the Toshiba PH3300U-1I72 3TB drive? Cool, I picked up 2 to replace 2 greens in my NAS that are probably living on borrowed time. I should unload these puppies on craigslist before they start spitting out errors.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 20:25
|
|
|
Civil posted:Cool, I picked up 2 to replace 2 greens in my NAS that are probably living on borrowed time.  Nice deal for someone looking for the SSD OS install and Storage ultra-combo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 00:55
|
|
|
ClassH posted:I set a friend up with server 2012 essentials + Drivepool+snapraid (newer whs more or less). The setup works pretty good as he has a bunch of different size drives and you can just add more drives as you please. I would suggest snapraid if your library is mostly static as it is pretty easy to use and can rebuild one (or two) bad drives. Hey, thanks so much. I hadn't heard of Snapraid and will go do some reading. And yes, the library is mostly static. Once I rip a Blu-Ray, say, it goes into its final location and stays forever. I'll have the same size drives, with a smaller one for the operating system. Incidentally, would you (or anyone else) recommend Server 2012 Essentials over WHS2011? I'm concerned that 2011 is a tad outdated (although it's supported until 2016, and on sale until December this year), but it's much cheaper than Essentials (by hundreds of dollars) which is important to me. My main aim is to replicate the functionality of my WHSv1 server - DE/Drivepool, streaming media over my network etc. I don't have any need for RAID, as I only have a few dozen Gb of important data that I back up on another machine. And I'm simply not confident enough in Linux/Unix to go down that road, so Microsoft it is. EDIT: Updated after I saw how much more expensive SE2012 is than WHS2011. I have to say at this point I'm edging towards WHS2011, in terms of functionality and cost. I mean, WHSv1 is doing everything I want it to at the moment, so perhaps for a home user 2011 is all I need. modeski fucked around with this message at 07:44 on Sep 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 01:43
|
|
|
Anyone else serving both Samba and NFS shares on FreeBSD+ZFS? My Samba performance is pretty good, ~70megs/second over gige, but my NFS performance is just a little over 1 meg/second over 100mbit. I tried playing with the NFS settings like rsize but it didn't help at all. The only client I've tested with so far is also FreeBSD. Anyone have any suggestions?
Ninja Rope fucked around with this message at 05:19 on Sep 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 05:15
|
|
|
modeski posted:Hey, thanks so much. I hadn't heard of Snapraid and will go do some reading. And yes, the library is mostly static. Once I rip a Blu-Ray, say, it goes into its final location and stays forever. I'll have the same size drives, with a smaller one for the operating system. Incidentally, would you (or anyone else) recommend Server 2012 Essentials over WHS2011? I'm concerned that 2011 is a tad outdated (although it's supported until 2016, and on sale until December this year), but it's much cheaper than Essentials (by hundreds of dollars) which is important to me. My main aim is to replicate the functionality of my WHSv1 server - DE/Drivepool, streaming media over my network etc. I don't have any need for RAID, as I only have a few dozen Gb of important data that I back up on another machine. And I'm simply not confident enough in Linux/Unix to go down that road, so Microsoft it is. WHS 2011 would be fine. SE2012 fills a few more rolls for small business but there is not much that a home server would really take advantage of.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 14:06
|
|
|
parsleyc posted:Does anyone have an opinion on the Toshiba PH3300U-1I72 3TB drive? Added 4 of them to my cart, and then forgot to check out! 
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 16:01
|
|
|
Pay $80 more and get 4 7200 RPM Seagate?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 16:29
|
|
|
deimos posted:Pay $80 more and get 4 7200 RPM Seagate?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 16:55
|
|
|
ilkhan posted:I've got 4 of those I'm going to be selling here pretty quickly that I'll probably let go at $105, FYI. I'm definitely interested edit: sent a PM
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 17:29
|
|
|
deimos posted:Pay $80 more and get 4 7200 RPM Seagate? This is what I have my eye on. I'm going to hold out for cyber Monday though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 18:29
|
|
|
If anyone is interesting I'm selling my N40L with 8GB ECC: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3570590
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 18:45
|
|
|
Jumping back into this thread after months of inaction on my proposed NAS setup. I'd definitely leaning towards the easy way out and WSH2011 with Drivepool. I'm doing much the same as Modeski, just ripping my collection of dvds/blu rays and keeping a huge collection of movie files in the folder "movies". What no one seems to be able to answer me is: How viable is this at the HTPC itself? not as a file server to another computer which serves as HTPC, but as the HTPC itself? for the records, the HTPC thread nor the XMBC thread could give me a definitive answer, so I pose it to you guys. Obviously, it's going to need to be tricked out graphics card wise and RAM wise. I accept that. Also people just posted some 7200 rpm big drives. What's the best? The Reds? the seagates? also, is 4TB worth messing with or should i stick to 3's?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 21:38
|
|
|
Given that an old dual-core Atom(it might be a hyperthreaded single-core actually) with 2GB of RAM and integrated ION video can still decode and play 1080p video across the network just fine with XBMC(just can't do Netflix, no Silverlight  ) I'd say you'd have a pretty hard time building anything approaching a decent NAS that couldn't do the same.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 22:23
|
|
|
I have an older Dual Core Atom D945GCLF2 that has the same performance as you say, it has great I/O but being RAM limited to 2GB makes it a bit harder to do anything useful beyond basic filesharing. That and mine only having a PCI slot (rather than PCIe) makes for poor general performance with a 4 port SATA card (Syba SiliconImage 3114). I barely break 40MB/s through the card, though get closer to 70MB/s with the SATA300 ports onboard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2013 19:10
|
|
|
Oh, I agree. I'd never use it as a NAS. The point was more that if this can handle XBMC, then whatever you'd have to build for a NAS would naturally be much higher spec and therefore able to do the same even better.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2013 19:32
|
|
|
So any comments on these large 3tb and 4tb drives? Is 1tb per platter good or bad? Seagate or WD Red? Really wanna make a purchase soon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2013 19:37
|
|
|
I have a 3TB Seagate NAS and it consistently runs warmer than my other Seagate, but I'm pleased enough with it that I'm going to get another in about 6 months.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2013 20:11
|
|
|
Gozinbulx posted:So any comments on these large 3tb and 4tb drives? Is 1tb per platter good or bad? Seagate or WD Red? Really wanna make a purchase soon. No one seems to have problems with the large drives. WD Reds are frequently recommended. Speaking of, Newegg had 3TB Reds for sale for $115 or so this morning, so I grabbed a couple. The general recommendation is not to use Newegg for drives, though. They have an absurd amount of failures, while Amazon users seem to be pleased.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2013 20:40
|
|
|
Civil posted:Speaking of, Newegg had 3TB Reds for sale for $115 or so this morning, so I grabbed a couple. The general recommendation is not to use Newegg for drives, though. They have an absurd amount of failures, while Amazon users seem to be pleased. With that in mind, I'm waiting for some sort of Amazon sale, 3TB Reds are great deals at that price. AlternateAccount posted:Oh, I agree. I'd never use it as a NAS. The point was more that if this can handle XBMC, then whatever you'd have to build for a NAS would naturally be much higher spec and therefore able to do the same even better. If mine in specific had 2 RAM slots, it'd be far better than the Core2Duo Optiplex 755 I use running WHS2011 with pfsense and freeNAS VMs. I suppose ESXi could do that inside of 2GB, but its pushing it. Instead, I can't even really figure out a use for it, since it can't play HD content nor has the CPU power for Silverlight/Flash. DJ Commie fucked around with this message at 20:53 on Sep 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2013 20:44
|
|
|
DJ Commie posted:With that in mind, I'm waiting for some sort of Amazon sale, 3TB Reds are great deals at that price. One thing I have been considering doing with an old computer (A64 gen1 clawhammer, DDR1 ram so 2GB maximum) is using it as a cold storage backup. My main fileserver would periodically (say once a week) wake that computer up and then do an incremental backup of all "very important data" (mostly documents and certainly not many huge binary files). I recently had a power supply fail taking out the motherboard in my desktop and reminding me of the importance of physical isolation of data because a faulty PSU can pretty much toast anything and everything in a computer. Because it would be a cold storage solution, being slow is of no consequence (and it would be slow, ssh maxes out at ~ 20MB/s due to cipher cpu overhead while SMB is only approximately double that speed) and weekly incremental backups are probably going to at most 10GB in size. Power usage is not really a concern either as it's only going to be on an hour or two a week. It's also extremely cheap as everything except the hard drives is lying around as spare parts and since the hard drives are going to running very infrequently using super cheap Greens is of no consequence really.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2013 21:57
|
|
|
That does seem like a perfect use for a cheap NAS, but the power savings really isn't worth the cost of something from D-Link.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2013 22:31
|
|
|
Any particular problem with the 4 TB's as opposed to the 3 TB's? I'm trying to find reviews but Amazon has the stupidest approach to reviews ever, grouping all WD Red drive reviews (2, 3 and 4 TB) all together.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2013 06:24
|
|
|
Gozinbulx posted:Any particular problem with the 4 TB's as opposed to the 3 TB's? I'm trying to find reviews but Amazon has the stupidest approach to reviews ever, grouping all WD Red drive reviews (2, 3 and 4 TB) all together.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2013 06:42
|
|
|
Gozinbulx posted:Any particular problem with the 4 TB's as opposed to the 3 TB's? I'm trying to find reviews but Amazon has the stupidest approach to reviews ever, grouping all WD Red drive reviews (2, 3 and 4 TB) all together. While it is stupid, I don't ever recall drives of increasing capacity ever causing issues. Things like WD green failing and the old Deathstars were either due to lovely firmware or read head operation, and never due to increasing platter density or number of platters. And who knows what the hell is up with Newegg's WD Red drives. We've all just attributed it to shoddy handling.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2013 17:05
|
|
|
Civil posted:And who knows what the hell is up with Newegg's WD Red drives. We've all just attributed it to shoddy handling. This really has been a persistent thing for YEARS now. I remember ordering hard drives back in... 2005 or 2006 to build a computer, and 3 or 4 out of 5 were DOA. It's down to their lovely packing, mostly. UPS is rough on packages by nature, and newegg just doesn't acknowledge that issue in their packaging. Ordering from Amazon has been 100% success rate for me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2013 19:11
|
|
|
Civil posted:While it is stupid, I don't ever recall drives of increasing capacity ever causing issues. I can attest to this during single drives, but one thing to remember is very large drives in an array have a very long rebuild time. That is a vulnerable window for another drive to poo poo the bed, or hit a URE. (I know this is beating a dead horse in this thread, but just wanted to state it)
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2013 19:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 08:29 |
|
|
teamdest posted:This really has been a persistent thing for YEARS now. I remember ordering hard drives back in... 2005 or 2006 to build a computer, and 3 or 4 out of 5 were DOA. It's down to their lovely packing, mostly. UPS is rough on packages by nature, and newegg just doesn't acknowledge that issue in their packaging. Ordering from Amazon has been 100% success rate for me. I've ordered 4 drives from Newegg this week, and they all shipped via Ontrac, which is what Amazon uses most of the time (for me). I have Prime and prefer Amazon because they're generally awesome for everything, but Newegg had some serious sales, so I went with them. And they've always had excellent customer service as well. Not as good as Amazon, but better than shitbuckets like Tigerdirect.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2013 20:10
|
|