Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > Advice Please: NAS (Loads of storage on home LAN)

Reply
Thread Tools

Advice Please: NAS (Loads of storage on home LAN)

 
 
Craig Shore
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2006
On Wed, 17 May 2006 09:00:24 +1200, Enkidu <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Steve wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 May 2006 07:12:57 +1200, thingy wrote:
>>>
>>> Another thing to consider is getting a good gigabyte NIC on board
>>> (even two and bonding them in load balance mode) ie a e1000 NIC,
>>> anything based on the 8139 is best avoided for heavy loads if
>>> possible. I would suggest a gigabyte motherboard with firewire as
>>> my choice (later external drives are then easy, if not cheap....
>>> and with plenty of pci slots so you can add cheap ata/sata
>>> controllers.
>>>

>Thingy, re the GB NICs. If you are bonding NICs, it is not much use
>unless you either have a switch with trunking or two switches. Many
>small switches aren't capable (as I've found out). Also the other end of
>the connection, presumably a workstation, would also have to have two
>NICs to take advantage of the extra bandwidth. I'm guessing from the
>brief description of the setup that there is unlikely to be more than
>one machine at a time accessing the NAS machine at any one time, but
>that's a guess.


But if there was to be more than one machine accessing it then it might be worth
it, but only if the system is going to be able to keep up (PCI bus, disc access,
etc).


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Craig Shore
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2006
On Tue, 16 May 2006 22:53:56 +1200, "Peter Nield" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


>When medium-shifting, I use my workstation to do the work, and then transfer
>the result to the server. It takes a little while to shift 1GB of Data -
>about three minutes (whoop-de-do) over Fast Ethernet.


But if you're transferring DVD sized video, that's something like 20mins.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
~misfit~
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2006
thingy wrote:
> ~misfit~ wrote:
>> thingy wrote:
>>
>>> The Hobbit wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi All,
>>>> I'm wanting to setup a NAS on my home network and am looking for
>>>> recommendations for a motherboard with a buttload of SATA/IDE
>>>> connectors which I can hang a ton of drives off - that also takes a
>>>> low power CPU.
>>>>
>>>> I'm planning to leave the machine running (debian) 24/7 as it will
>>>> host all my home media and will need to handle upward of 3 TB of
>>>> data if I was to format shift my CDs/DVDs (once it becomes legal of
>>>> course ) Any suggestions as to brand/supplier of such a MB would
>>>> be greatly appreciated.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Another thing to consider is getting a good gigabyte NIC on board
>>> (even two and bonding them in load balance mode) ie a e1000 NIC,
>>> anything based on the 8139 is best avoided for heavy loads if
>>> possible. I would suggest a gigabyte motherboard with firewire as
>>> my choice (later external drives are then easy, if not cheap....
>>> and with plenty of pci slots so you can add cheap ata/sata
>>> controllers.

>>
>>
>> PCI to SATA/PATA controllers was also going to be my suggestion. DSE
>> have some for less than $50 each that support two SATA ports and one
>> (dual fifo) PATA/133 connector. I've ben using one for a while now
>> with no problems.

>
> Sounds like a plan...


For a cheap controller they work well.

>>> Also consider the case, I am looking for a small server case with
>>> heaps of 5.25inch ext bays for a similar function. Firstin have them
>>> occasionally very cheap ($130), buy a good PSU for them and you are
>>> away....
>>> Packing in 10 x 300 gig drives is a bi of an issue, there are a few
>>> 5.25inch units that will pack 4 drives into 3 bays (lan-li) and the
>>> promise ones do 5 drives in 3 bays, they will need a fan on them or
>>> at that density they will cook...

>>
>>
>> Indeed. That was also my main concern on reading the OP. HDDs output
>> a hell of a lot of heat and it's something a lot of people don't
>> consider. Good cooling will be very important.

>
> Noise of 10 drives as well...


Yeah, there is that to consider too. However, I rather think the noise of
the fans to *cool* 10 drives in the same case will drown out the sound of
the drives themselves. It's not like one or two fans will do it. *All*
drives will have to have air moving over them. My drives are running at
about 5-8C above ambient with air drawn into the case from the room and
blown directly around them. Without that they easilly get 20-25C above
ambient, well above the designer's specs in a NZ summer in a warm room.
(This room hits well over 30 with the doors/window open).

>>> Should be good solution to stop my kids scratching the dvds to
>>> hell... Once its legal of course

>>
>>
>> Of course. I would suggest the use of Auto Gordian Knot/Virtual Dub
>> to change the format to XviD. As long as you don't go silly with
>> compression ratios and you do double-pass encoding I doubt you'll
>> notice the quality difference at, say, around 700MB per hour
>> compression.

>
> K, I dont have any disks yet....saving for 3 x 300 gig disks....then
> raid 5 them....reading needs to be fast.....have you come across a
> fast but cheap raid 5 capable pci card? the ones I have seen cost too
> much.....might software raid....but I dont like it....


I haven't looked to be honest. RAID and multiple large disks are beyond my
budget and I haven't had a friend interested so no research....

> Less compression
>> maybe for fast action movies. (Although I find that approximate
>> ratio to be absolutely fine). That cuts down on the storage space
>> needed considerably.

>
> yep....kinda hacked off thet there is no legal changing of format here
> in NZ...I dont appreciate it when young children regulary munt DVDs to
> go and buy new ones, legal copying once or to a different format
> should be perfectly acceptable IMHO.


Well, They can put me in jail for it if they want to. I've lost many, many
LPs, CDs, VHS tapes and a few DVDs to damage to the original media over the
years. Thousands of dollars worth. I'm no longer trusting anything I've paid
for to just one copy. I've copied a lot of my CDs for playing in the car
(especially as quite a few of the originals are borderline playable) and
have ripped/encoded a lot of them to an mp3 playlist for home listening. The
originals stay safely in my drawer where they won't deteriorate further. If
the government want to punish me for it they'll have to put me in jail
'cause I sure as hell can't pay a fine.

Hell, on occasion I've gone beyond that and downloaded copies of albums I
used to own, albums that have long-since been thrown out due to
scratching/damage. (Just downloaded Pink Floyd "Meddle" and "Wish You Were
Here") I figure I've already paid for the damn thing, I'm entitled to own a
copy of it. It is, after all, IP, not the media it's stored on that's of
value. If I've paid for it once I'm not paying for it again. (Actually, some
albums I've already bought more than one copy of. I've bought "Wish You Were
Here" on vinyl, cassette and CD).
--
Shaun.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter Nield
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2006

"Craig Shore" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Tue, 16 May 2006 22:53:56 +1200, "Peter Nield" <(E-Mail Removed)>

wrote:
>
>
> >When medium-shifting, I use my workstation to do the work, and then

transfer
> >the result to the server. It takes a little while to shift 1GB of Data -
> >about three minutes (whoop-de-do) over Fast Ethernet.

>
> But if you're transferring DVD sized video, that's something like 20mins.
>

Oh, forgot to mention the DivXing

OTOH, you don't HAVE to sit there watching DVD Decrypter do its stuff.
That's a bit tedious.

Definitely not worth waiting for Nero (or other DivX/XviD tool) do it's
stuff either.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Enkidu
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2006
Craig Shore wrote:
> On Wed, 17 May 2006 09:00:24 +1200, Enkidu
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>> Steve wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 16 May 2006 07:12:57 +1200, thingy wrote:
>>>
>>>> Another thing to consider is getting a good gigabyte NIC on
>>>> board (even two and bonding them in load balance mode) ie a
>>>> e1000 NIC, anything based on the 8139 is best avoided for heavy
>>>> loads if possible. I would suggest a gigabyte motherboard with
>>>> firewire as my choice (later external drives are then easy, if
>>>> not cheap.... and with plenty of pci slots so you can add cheap
>>>> ata/sata controllers.
>>>>

>>
>> Thingy, re the GB NICs. If you are bonding NICs, it is not much use
>> unless you either have a switch with trunking or two switches.
>> Many small switches aren't capable (as I've found out). Also the
>> other end of the connection, presumably a workstation, would also
>> have to have two NICs to take advantage of the extra bandwidth. I'm
>> guessing from the brief description of the setup that there is
>> unlikely to be more than one machine at a time accessing the NAS
>> machine at any one time, but that's a guess.

>
> But if there was to be more than one machine accessing it then it
> might be worth it, but only if the system is going to be able to keep
> up (PCI bus, disc access, etc).
>

Yeah agreed, but in a situation like the one described, assuming two
machines aren't rendering at the same time, then the load caused by the
other machine on the network would likely not be too high.

Thingy was talking about using bonded NICs for load balancing which
really implies a lot of traffic end to end. My point was not to rubbish
Thingy's idea, but to point out that both ends need to be capable of
being bonded and the switch needs to support trunking or there need to
be two seperate paths. If more than one machine is connecting and
needing high bandwidth then my comment does not apply as regards both
ends being bonded> I'm not sure but I think that the switch still needs
to understand trunking, basically because a bonded set only has one
hardware address.

Cheers,

Cliff
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
EonNAS 1100 NAS Network Storage Server Becky Front Page News 0 01-16-2013 05:47 PM
Asustor AS-602T 2-Bay NAS Network Attached Storage Device Becky Front Page News 0 12-30-2012 02:16 PM
Urgent requirement of NetApp SAN/NAS Storage Engineer-InfrastructureEngineer @ Hartford, CT for 6+ months Ravi C Programming 0 06-05-2012 05:50 PM
QNAP TS-419P Turbo NAS 4-Bay Network Storage Review Ian Front Page News 0 11-25-2009 08:44 AM
QNAP TS-219P Dual-Bay Home and SOHO NAS Ian Front Page News 0 09-04-2009 08:11 AM



Advertisments