Jump to content

Re-configuring storage. Advice/thoughts?


Guest asrequested

Recommended Posts

Latchmor

Lol...yeah I did see that. Just confirming Synology not xpenology. Bought NAS as opposed to built NAS.

 

Yeah I did realise after I posted that I have no idea if xpenology behaves differently!  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest asrequested

Build NAS all the way, with a real CPU

Is what I'm thinking. Just trying to figure out if/what I'll do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest asrequested

But I'm intending this to be purely storage. The server will still run on my Threadripper, in a different box.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jdiesel

If that is the case I suppose the biggest benefit to building your own is that you won't be limited by HDD slots like you would with a commercial NAS. Once you get above 4 slots commercial NAS's get expensive real fast. 

 

Do you have have/plan any encrypted disks? That might be the only area where a beefier CPU with benefit you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jdiesel

Is your Threadripper server on 24/7? If so I don't see much benefit moving your storage to a NAS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest asrequested

Is your Threadripper server on 24/7? If so I don't see much benefit moving your storage to a NAS

It is, but windows 10 keeps the drives constantly spinning. So I was thinking a NAS would be good to save a little energy and also run cooler, which then allows me to slow down the fans. So it'll run quieter, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest asrequested

This was the NAS that caught my eye. But there's something else I want to buy. And I figured it'd be fun to build my own. Plus, using my server box will give me more drive bays.

 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B01N55UCIX/ref=mp_s_a_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1521750970&sr=8-3&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_QL65&keywords=12+bay+nas&dpPl=1&dpID=41Upe9bA9WL&ref=plSrch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PenkethBoy

This was the NAS that caught my eye. But there's something else I want to buy. And I figured it'd be fun to build my own. Plus, using my server box will give me more drive bays.

 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B01N55UCIX/ref=mp_s_a_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1521750970&sr=8-3&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_QL65&keywords=12+bay+nas&dpPl=1&dpID=41Upe9bA9WL&ref=plSrch

This is a very under powered NAS - people have complained on the QNAP forums - but for just being a file server its OK

 

Why not look at the ryzen based NAS's

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest asrequested

This is a very under powered NAS - people have complained on the QNAP forums - but for just being a file server its OK

 

Why not look at the ryzen based NAS's

It's only going to be storage. It won't be doing anything else. I'm not actually going to buy that QNAP. It was just the first one I found that came close to my desire. The weakest CPU I have at my disposal, is an i5 6500. So that's what I'll be using for the NAS, should I actually build one. If I had the space, I'd probably build a separate NAS. I've got multiple possibilities for reconfiguring. I've got most of the stuff to build another machine.

 

Why yes, yes I do! I've just of something else I could do! I have to think on that,a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PenkethBoy

you do realise that a NAS is just a pc with storage and can be accessed over the network and it does not have to have a NAS badge to be one  :P

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jdiesel

Your Threadripper server is rackmounted right? How about a second rackmounted enclosure and a SAS expander? Solve the issue with space in your server enclosure. Then work on fixing the issue with the drives not spinning down in Windows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest asrequested

Your Threadripper server is rackmounted right? How about a second rackmounted enclosure and a SAS expander? Solve the issue with space in your server enclosure. Then work on fixing the issue with the drives not spinning down in Windows.

That's what I said in my OP. The difference being, that I don't want to waste time fixing Windows 10, and why I was thinking of a NAS OS in place of windows 10. I have another box already on the rack, I use drive pooling, so I won't be able to use that if I use a different OS.

 

I'm not actually solving a problem. Just looking to alleviate my bordem and streamline things, a bit :D

 

I need something new! Lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest asrequested

After a cursory look, ZFS is appealing. I haven't used linux, before, so that'll be a nice learning curve. I can play with Ubuntu.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CBers

I haven't used linux, before, so that'll be a nice learning curve.

Everyone says that when they first start :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PenkethBoy

After a cursory look, ZFS is appealing. I haven't used linux, before, so that'll be a nice learning curve. I can play with Ubuntu.

Oh God!  :P

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

mastrmind11

After a cursory look, ZFS is appealing. I haven't used linux, before, so that'll be a nice learning curve. I can play with Ubuntu.

Once you learn it well, Windows will seems like a POS.  I only have a windows pc (7 years old) so I can run Microsoft Money.  Literally, that's the only reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CBers

Once you learn it well, Windows will seems like a POS. I only have a windows pc (7 years old) so I can run Microsoft Money. Literally, that's the only reason.

As a Unix Systems Admin by trade, they each have their own pluses and minuses.

 

I have enough of Unix at work, so run Windows at home.

 

For home use, Windows is generally easier to use for the average user.

 

Although sometimes you just wish an OS would do the same as the other OS, but it goes both ways :)

 

Having Ubuntu now available under Windows 10, I do get the best of both worlds.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

dcrdev

As a Unix Systems Admin by trade, they each have their own pluses and minuses.

 

I have enough of Unix at work, so run Windows at home.

 

For home use, Windows is generally easier to use for the average user.

 

Although sometimes you just wish an OS would do the same as the other OS, but it goes both ways :)

 

Having Ubuntu now available under Windows 10, I do get the best of both worlds.

 

 

I agree that both have their merits:

 

Windows:

Software availability and current gaming.

Desktop environment is a lot more polished than desktop environments on Linux

 

Linux:

Literally everything else

 

I've always used Linux on servers and headless machines, but about two years ago switched to Linux on the desktop due to it becoming increasingly difficult to work outside the workflow Microsoft expects of you i.e. Bing, Edge, Microsoft account integration. I was finding more and more no matter how I tweaked the system, those tweaks would eventually revert in an update.

 

The Linux desktop environments aren't yet as polished as the Windows desktop (although they have come a significant way) , but as someone who likes to tinker and fix imaginary problems - it's not an issue for me. I'll never go back - although have to use Windows at work.

 

Linux on servers just makes a hell of a lot of sense and if you disagree with me on that point that's fine, but I challenge you to find a better file system than ZFS - it's the greatest tool I have ever come across.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

tdiguy

I use ubuntu on my home server primarily because a windows license is about 100$ and its just not worth the money to me. Ubuntu is easy to use and very stable. You can even install tings like webmin which makes administering the system even easier and its pretty handy on a headless system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CharleyVarrick

@

not sure if you got your drives to spin down yet.

To partly achieve that, I have created a couple of scheduled taks in w7, with simple batch files, one to force the server to go to sleep about 30mins past my usual bedtime, and the other to wake it up at my usual wake time. Once in a while, I need to suspend the sleep task for maintenance purpose or what not.

 

It's not perfect but it does save roughly 33% of run time/wear and tear/heat/ hydro bill and such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CharleyVarrick

Before joining Emby, my server was running Ubuntu LTS 12-something, for close to 3 years.

I had to rely (read: depend) heavily on a Linux superfan friend of mine, not only to get going, but more importantly each time I ran into problems (yes I did ran into problems with Linux, quite a few actually, as an OS is an OS).

 

My friend continually amazed me telling we precisely what to write (all from memory) in the terminal to get things done. But I eventually got fedup of my tech support dependency to the point I switched back to W7. Is it perfect? Of course not, sadly there ain't such a thing. But when I have problems, I can manage by myself 99% of the time (Googling here and there).

 

With a little over 20 years experience, I'm a GUI guy who could never master command prompt (or terminal), and in my 3 year run with Ubuntu, I realized most everything runs with terminal. On the positive side, the Linux forum was EXTREMELY helpful, willing and good natured. 

 

That little penguin just never grew on me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...