|
|
 |
|
The following page was printed from RemoteCentral.com:
| Topic: | rack mountable NAS This thread has 26 replies. Displaying posts 16 through 27. |
|
| Post 16 made on Saturday February 18, 2006 at 20:02 |
ejfiii Select Member |
Joined:
Posts: | July 2003
2,021 |
|
|
Julie, you might want to include that RAID 1 and 0 require only 2 drives while RAID 1+0 requires 4 drives minimum and RAID 5 requires 3 drives minimum. Also, all drives in a RAID array need to be identical drives (not just in size). Finally, note that RAID 5 is a bit more complicated to rebuild after a drive failure while RAID 1 is simple.
Having just built my first RAID system (RAID1), I am really impressed - the technology has truly trickled down to the home level with inexpensive SATA drives and PCI cards. I dont think I'd build another home computer without it.
|
|
| Post 17 made on Sunday February 19, 2006 at 05:44 |
stereoguy823 Advanced Member |
Joined:
Posts: | February 2005
885 |
|
|
Many thanks to AHEM and Julie for the explanations. Obviously superior to just a network HDD.
|
Sticking to what I'm good at. |
|
| Post 18 made on Sunday February 19, 2006 at 07:28 |
Springs Super Member |
Joined:
Posts: | May 2002
3,238 |
|
|
I have a modified buffalo link station. Is about the size of many USB based drives. I can but whatever hard drive I want in it. It is small and uses very little power. Comes up as a shared drive on windows networks. Has a web based utility to do maintaince... can even hook up an external USB to it for instant access to files and to make back ups. Includes a print server too. [Link: buffalotech.com]Mine is actually a revolution box for the DIY guy. I was learning about Linux and it was a good platform to start on.
|
|
| Post 19 made on Monday February 20, 2006 at 10:04 |
Ted Wetzel Founding Member |
Joined:
Posts: | November 2001
879 |
|
|
On February 17, 2006 at 23:28, installtech said...
|
I do something like that at home, except that
the OS is on a hard drive. I use a Via mini-itx
motherboard that runs fanless with a small power
supply and a 250 Gb hard drive, running ClarkConnect
(don't have the URL handy, sorry.)
The whole thing is smaller than a shoebox and
almost totally silent, and it's uptime is over
a year with no problems. Works great. this sounds exactly like what I'm hoping to do soon. I just figured that a NAS drive would be easier, more quiet and less power draw. But something in a box with a raid array that draws very little power would be a better solution for me. For those looking for a possible cheap solution for a raid array, staples is having a sale this week... [Link: staples.shoplocal.com]
|
|
| Post 20 made on Monday February 20, 2006 at 10:35 |
tsvisser Founding Member |
Joined:
Posts: | March 2002
1,228 |
|
|
There is also RAID-6, which is similiar to RAID-5, except the stripe is maintained so that any 2 drives can go down. When RAID-5 has a drive failure, your whole volume is in danger of being gone forever if you loose another drive.
There is also RAID-50, which is similiar in concept to 10 or 0+1, only with a 6 drive minimum array. Obviously not a very cost effective solution.
Don't rely on any RAID array to provide total secuiryt. A power surge could wipe out a whole group of disks. A stray bullet or fire could also cause physical damage, so also have a plan for remote site backup or transfer of media to another location to account for physical security.
|
|
|
| Post 21 made on Monday February 20, 2006 at 23:50 |
tsvisser Founding Member |
Joined:
Posts: | March 2002
1,228 |
|
|
talk about coincidence and bad luck... girlfriend drops one of my hard drive enclosures earlier this evening (showing friends some pictures) not long after I post regarding backup and RAID stripes. only lost a small amount of work, about an hour or so, and now my current data collection is at risk. I do have a backup in another machine, but it would be a PITA to retrieve it right now.
here's hoping that my primary drive does not fail...
|
|
|
| Post 22 made on Tuesday February 21, 2006 at 11:17 |
RC Geek Advanced Member |
Joined:
Posts: | April 2003
826 |
|
|
Well, I've just got to chime in... RAID-6 has primarily been developed due to... challenges with reliability on SATA drives. It's great if you want an inexpensive (relative to SCSI) solution with some semblance of reliability. If you want reliability on drives... I'd have to recommend Seagate as tops and Maxtor near the bottom.
|
Having once decided to achieve a certain task, achieve it at all costs of tedium and distaste. The gain in self-confidence of having accomplished a tiresome labor is immense. -----Arnold Bennett |
|
| Post 23 made on Tuesday February 21, 2006 at 11:44 |
avophiliac Long Time Member |
Joined:
Posts: | January 2004
141 |
|
|
I have a whole pile of Western Digital drives you could put the Maxtors on!
|
|
| Post 24 made on Tuesday February 21, 2006 at 12:22 |
juliejacobson CE Pro Magazine |
Joined:
Posts: | April 2003
3,032 |
|
|
On February 20, 2006 at 23:50, tsvisser said...
talk about coincidence and bad luck... girlfriend
drops one of my hard drive enclosures earlier
this evening (showing friends some pictures) Did you dump her?
|
"CEPro: your website sucks!" - Fins www.cepro.com[Link: twitter.com] |
|
| Post 25 made on Tuesday February 21, 2006 at 16:16 |
tsvisser Founding Member |
Joined:
Posts: | March 2002
1,228 |
|
|
no, the words "its not your fault", "no baby, I didn't loose anything important", "its OK, I was going to buy a new drive anyways" came out of my mouth.
pick and choose your fights fellas (and julie). there are arguments that are worth winning, and then there are those that have no clear exit strategy, except you exiting to the couch.
|
|
|
| Post 26 made on Sunday February 26, 2006 at 20:56 |
HiFidel Long Time Member |
Joined:
Posts: | July 2005
165 |
|
|
Single thumb spousal component control at remotecentral.com
|
|
| Post 27 made on Monday February 27, 2006 at 00:26 |
tsvisser Founding Member |
Joined:
Posts: | March 2002
1,228 |
|
|
so... the solution that I ended up taking... I had an old Imerge M1000 that was replaced with a more modern media server. Ripped the thing apart and am putting it back together as a Solaris 10 server... but first, I might put XP on it. Winamp has a release that supports Fast User switching. The Imerge uses M-Audio Delta cards, which are easily accessible. I want to see if I can use it to serve 8 simultaneous Winamp streams and use remote desktop for controls. If this works, my next step will be to write a serial protocol to allow multiple user controls from the serial port or an IP node. iTunes currently supports Fast User Switching on OS-X, but not XP. It would be interesting if future versions of iTunes were to support multiple audio ouputs, then you wouldn't have to deal with the resource overhead of multiple user accounts. Also, user profiles should be able to be applied to each output, sort of an advanced implementation of the local/remote speaker selection currently deployed. Anyone here, industry types, have some contacts with the development people in Cupertino? With a little direction and minor work, iTunes could actually become a real home product, rather than a desktop product. FRANK-MERGE-STEIN Abit K7A motherboard AMD Athlon 2600+ Socket A 1.5 GB 133 SDRAM 3 drive RAID-5 DVD new higher power ATX power supply
Last edited by tsvisser
on February 27, 2006 00:35.
|
|
|
 |
Before you can reply to a message... |
You must first register for a Remote Central user account - it's fast and free! Or, if you already have an account, please login now. |
Please read the following: Unsolicited commercial advertisements are absolutely not permitted on this forum. Other private buy & sell messages should be posted to our Marketplace. For information on how to advertise your service or product click here. Remote Central reserves the right to remove or modify any post that is deemed inappropriate.
|
|
