Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2014 23:14:32 -0400 From: Paul Kraus <paul@kraus-haus.org> To: "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: affordable NAS Message-ID: <083A50D8-74E5-4D81-AA58-D0AF5219D0AF@kraus-haus.org> In-Reply-To: <53D3F606.2090308@tysdomain.com> References: <53D3F606.2090308@tysdomain.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jul 26, 2014, at 14:40, Littlefield, Tyler <tyler@tysdomain.com> = wrote: > I was looking at the NAS minis, and while they look amazing they're = also way expensive. I was interested to see if someone has a good = solution for a cheap small NAS system that I could either build or = purchase that wouldn't cost nearly as much. I'm looking for = freebsd-compatible hardware with at least a gigabit ethernet card. I have been running 9.2 on an HP Proliant Micro Server N36L (the = original not the Gen 8) ever since 9.2 came out with 8GB RAM. I am = currently building it=92s replacement, a Micro Proliant N54L with 16GB = RAM and FreeBSD 10. > I'll be dropping in the harddrives, I'm thinking raid 10 (though it = doesn't have to be--I just wanted the striping for a larger disk space = plus redundancy via mirror), with maybe 4 2 tb drives. My current disk layout is: 2 drives for OS (mirrored with ZFS): originally 250GB, now 500GB as the = Seagate 250GB drives died. 6 drives for Data, all 1 TB, configured as a 5 disk RAIDz2 and 1 hot = spare. 3 of the Data drives are internal, 1 of the OS drives is internal 2 of the data drives, the data hot spare, the second OS drive are in an = external StarTech 4 drive enclosure connected via a Marvell chipset = eSATA card The problem with the above is that the external enclose puts those 4 = drive behind a port expander / multiplier and those are know causes of = trouble. I have twice had a single drive in the enclosure fail and take = all four drives offline with it. My new server has: 16GB RAM In the Optical bay a 4 x 2.5=94 adapter A 4 port Marvell based SATA card (2 internal, 2 external) 2 of the 2.5=94 bays are contacted to the internal ports on the Marvell = card 2 120GB SSD in the 2.5=94 bays for: 4GB swap (gpt partitions handed to the OS) 16GB OS (ZFS mirror) 24GB for future ZFS L2ARC=20 24GB for future ZFS ZIL (mirrored) The SSD is underutilized on purpose to (hopefully) improve life, they = are Kingston V300 series because I got them on sale :-) The layout of the data drives remains the same but I have an external = chassis that is just a power supply and SATA cables. 4 of the data = drives will go in the internal 3.5=94 bays, the other two in the = external exclosure and attached to the 2 external eSATA ports. So one = drive per SATA port. I plan to add a second Marvell based 4 port SATA card, two for the other = two 2.5=94 bays and two more eSATA ports for future expansion. I have stayed with 1TB drives for data because I want to keep my = resilver times relatively short to reduce my chance of a double failure = at once.=20 My old hardware is being repurposed as my backup server with 4 x 2TB = drive internal. OS will be a 4 way mirror across them occupying 16GB = (plus another 2GB per drive for swap) with try remainder of the drives = in a RAIDz2. I=92ll be using zfs snapshots and then zfs send /recv to = synchronize the backup system. Since it is for backups, I am less = concerned with resilver times when a failure occurs. Also note that = since all the data on it will be from a zfs stream, resilver times = *should* be much shorter than the production system where there are = random writes join on all the time. -- Paul Kraus paul@kraus-haus.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?083A50D8-74E5-4D81-AA58-D0AF5219D0AF>