G+_Adam EL-Idrissi Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 Question time. My current freenas box is above the "safe" capacity. I have a haswell supermicro board that no one on eBay wants so I figure couple that with 16gb ran and an i3-4130t I'll be close to the micro server power consumption. Question is should I use the drives in the hp in the new build or new build and unraid the microserver? New build is getting 4 new drives (haven't decided on 3rb or 3rb drives yet). So it's either one large pool or two similar size pools on two different machines. I have offsite encrypted backups for import things and everything else can be replaced if need be knock on wood fingers crossed. Personally leaning towards one machine but there are smart storage users on here than I. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_610GARAGE Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 If I understand you correctly, you're asking if it would be better to have two pools or one large on. I think it would depend on what you're doing. With two pools, you would need to manually balance space. But if you have a storage pool and a video pool, I would think you would get better performance if you are streaming a video and copying files over at the same time since the drives won't have to do two tasks. On my nas, I have general storage, video storage (for editing) and vm storage. I have enough horsepower that coping over video won't affect my vms. Its also safier. If something were to happen to general storage, I would still have my vms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Adam EL-Idrissi Posted June 19, 2016 Author Share Posted June 19, 2016 610bob wow. Sorry about that. This post is all kinds of grammatical errors. My idea was build a new nas box to replace the hp since it only holds 4 drives. In the new nas I'll be using 4 drives but was wondering if I should add the 4 from the micro server giving the new build a total of 8 and get rid of the barebones micro server or have keep the micro server as is and added the new nas to the network essentially having two 5.7tb servers(after raid) instead of 1 12tb server(roughly after raid) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_610GARAGE Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 Adam EL-Idrissi I would combine the drives into one server. Reduce power consumption and one less server to manage. Also, not sure if you know this, or if you are using zfs, but you can't fill a zfs file system. When you do, you can't delete anything. ASk me how I know that. Grrr. :) So I would go as big as possible. Especially if you have already filled a 5.7tb server. What the heck do you have on there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Travis Hershberger Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 OBR10 (One Big Raid 10) is the rule anymore, so 1 big volume. Less power usage from a single system instead of 2. Ref: http://www.smbitjournal.com/2012/11/one-big-raid-10-a-new-standard-in-server-storage/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Adam EL-Idrissi Posted June 20, 2016 Author Share Posted June 20, 2016 610bob that's what I was leaning towards. Last I logged into the web client for freenas it gave me a warning for being over 80%. Still about 10% left. Most of what's on it is videos from defcon,security now,twiet, know how,my small DVDs collection,backups, a load of Debian/centos/Ubuntu iso and VM storage(diskless esxi host). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Adam EL-Idrissi Posted June 20, 2016 Author Share Posted June 20, 2016 Travis Hershberger I've been using raidz2 in freenas. Is that still safe for 8 drives? Need more reliability over crazy speeds. That's where the ssd will come in down the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Travis Hershberger Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 Adam EL-Idrissi Raidz2 should be ok. If I remember how much you have used, the rebuild when a drive goes bad will be painful. While painful, it should actually rebuild. However, a raidz1 would be expected to fail to rebuild. So long as you keep that in mind and get a drive replaced quickly when one goes bad, you should be fine. (You did order the drives from different sources, right?) ZFS does rebuilds differently than most other RAID systems in the industry. It is actually better than most, but the issues that concern storage people are no different. Reliability wise, RAID10 (or in the case of ZFS, many mirrors) is much, much safer. We're talking millions of array hours of experience with it. I, personally, haven't had experience in an environment that large, but I've had multiple RAID5 arrays fail to rebuild on me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Adam EL-Idrissi Posted June 20, 2016 Author Share Posted June 20, 2016 Travis Hershberger I'll be using 8 3tb Wd reds(buying four more. ) I bought the first batch all from newegg about 8 months ago. Would you say it's ok to get the new batch from them or should I go amazon(I've got prime if that matters). I looked at the raid calculator on serve the home and z2 gives me the most storage(other than jbod or z1). I'm going to get a single red from a different supplier than the batch and that'll be a spare. Also need a 5tb drive(or external) to move all my current data from the nas so I can wipe them and add them to the new one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Travis Hershberger Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 I'd get 2 drives from 2 different suppliers. NewEgg and Amazon work, I've had good luck finding storage at B+H Photo Video as well if you need another supplier. What you want to avoid is having lots of drives from the same batch in a single array, they tend to all fail at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts