|
Gwaihir posted:Hey Seagate ST3000DM001 buddy in poor choices! Hahaha. Going to RMA it this weekend. Super annoying  Got a suggestion for a good drive to buy instead? I know know what WD Red does but they are advertised as meant for NAS.
|
#
?
May 15, 2015 23:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 01:50 |
|
|
Tiger.Bomb posted:Hahaha. Going to RMA it this weekend. Super annoying Reds are just intended for NAS-like applications; they need not be restricted to a dedicated NAS-box. If you're running anything with RAID (or RAID-likes like ZFS) with it, it'd be a good choice.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2015 08:12
|
|
|
DrDork posted:The 3TB Seagates have been notorious for their poor reliability. Wasn't it just certain models of the 3TB drives from a few years ago that had the issues? I've been using 24 Seagate 3TB drives, and I just ordered 10 more a few days ago. The 2012 models have been running 24/7 for over 2 years without a hiccup (FreeBSD w/ ZFS). The 2014 models have been running 24/7 for a year without a hiccup (FreeBSD w/ ZFS). The latest batch all have late 2014 and early 2015 build dates. The 2012 drives are models ST33000650NS (ES.2/64MB). The 2014/2015 drives are model ST3000NM0033 (ES.3/128MB).
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2015 21:28
|
|
|
The ST3000DM001 in specific are bad, Backblaze did an article on how some 90% of theirs have failed over the last few years.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2015 21:32
|
|
|
Skandranon posted:The ST3000DM001 in specific are bad, Backblaze did an article on how some 90% of theirs have failed over the last few years. Okay, goddamnit. I was gonna ask if there's something else that could be going on with my loving system, since I had a failed one of those for a while I just replaced (raidz2, wasn't in a hurry) and during the resilver process one of the others kept going offline and then kept making GBS threads the bed last night while I was attempting to back things up to another raid. I've got new cables, new power splitters and a new 4-port sata controller card cause i wanted to blame everything but the actual drive. If I'm gonna start replacing these drives due to failure, if I'm using ZFS do they need to be the same type of drive or just the same size? If I start buying WD Red 3TB drives and swapping everything out, will that work replacing 1:1 with the Seagates?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
As long as they are the same size (or larger), it should be fine. No RAID implementation (that I've heard of) cares about the actual model # of a drive. Yes, WD Red 3tb drives should be fine.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 16:06
|
|
|
well the last time i replaced drives it was the start of that advanced format nonsense and the drives had different sector sizes and ended up with a different amount of formatted space and ended up totally fubar'ing my NAS back then. I would prefer not to have the same stuff happen.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
Telex posted:well the last time i replaced drives it was the start of that advanced format nonsense and the drives had different sector sizes and ended up with a different amount of formatted space and ended up totally fubar'ing my NAS back then. We won't be needing to go through that again for awhile, you should be safe this time.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
So I decided against a NAS OS. Installed Linux on a USB key. RMA'd the drive (but I don't want the same drive is the failure rate is 10% per year according to backblaze). Will add more for LVM parity and will start paying for off site backups. Got recommendations? Backblaze seems OK, and my buddy recommended another one for $12.50 a month that he likes (but I forget the name).
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2015 04:05
|
|
|
Depends, most of the cloud backup providers have a lot of hidden caveats. Backblaze will not backup items from a network location, or junction points, or even run on a Windows Server variant. Carbonite will start throttling your upload past 200gb to below 56k modem speeds. Crashplan seems the best in that it will let you upload data from a network location, and will run on Windows Server, but it requires Java.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2015 04:25
|
|
|
I use crashplan on my synology. Works great
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2015 04:32
|
|
|
I run Crashplan on my Windows desktop and have it backup both to and from my NAS and to their cloud. The backup to the NAS (including files from the NAS to itself) covers my desktop dying or reasonable file recovery needs. It's possible to make Crashplan run on FreeBSD/FreeNAS but it requires Linux emulation and that's one more layer of stuff I really don't want to be blocking me if something breaks and I need to do a restore. If you're mounting network shares for Crashplan under Windows you need to be doing it as the SYSTEM user. In practice this means I have stuff mounted twice - it's a little kludgy but it works. This won't cause problems if you're running it directly on your NAS, though.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2015 07:00
|
|
|
Desuwa posted:I run Crashplan on my Windows desktop and have it backup both to and from my NAS and to their butt. The backup to the NAS (including files from the NAS to itself) covers my desktop dying or reasonable file recovery needs. It's possible to make Crashplan run on FreeBSD/FreeNAS but it requires Linux emulation and that's one more layer of stuff I really don't want to be blocking me if something breaks and I need to do a restore. I had problems with this until I just manned up and presented an iSCSI LUN from FreeNAS to the 2012 R2 VM running Crashplan. I have all of my and my family's machine backing up to my server and the  for about 4 years now and can't say enough good about it.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2015 15:17
|
|
|
CrashPlan have an article on this topic: http://support.code42.com/CrashPlan/Latest/Backup/Backing_Up_A_Windows_Network_Drive
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2015 16:45
|
|
|
MrMoo posted:CrashPlan have an article on this topic: http://support.code42.com/CrashPlan/Latest/Backup/Backing_Up_A_Windows_Network_Drive At least they are trying to be supportive of their users, instead of cutting them off at the knees when they actually try to take advantage of the 'unlimited' plans offered. I appreciate Backblaze letting us know which drives they have problems with and such, but they make it impossible for me to actually use their service.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2015 16:50
|
|
|
anyone have an idea of how compatible an old (pool version 28) ZFS volume would be if I boot from the embedded type Nas4Free release which is apparently on some ZFS v5000 (da fuq). I think my boot drive has shat the bed, because my system coredumps frequently now and is unstable as gently caress. I need to get my data off the raid, and it keeps dying every time I try to use it and then won't boot from the boot drive again until i manually tell the BIOS to use it, which boggles my mind. I don't want to upgrade my pool version until I've got at least the 1TB-ish of the data off the old machine. Anyone know if this has any chance of loving my pool up if I don't find the older version on a CD somewhere to boot from instead of the latest?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
ZFS should be fully backwards compatible. THe v5000 is because open source ZFS decided to diverge from Sun ZFS. ZFS keeps adding features incrementally in all or nothing way, open source ZFS basically lets you enable what you want, so to support that it sets the pool to version 5000 and then does other stuff to enable features.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:ZFS should be fully backwards compatible. THe v5000 is because open source ZFS decided to diverge from Sun ZFS. ZFS keeps adding features incrementally in all or nothing way, open source ZFS basically lets you enable what you want, so to support that it sets the pool to version 5000 and then does other stuff to enable features. Yep, because of how the various Illumos/ZFS on Luniz/FreeBSD version of ZFS behave, doing a monolithic "v29 shall have features x, y, z and t' became completely unsupportable. The v5000 feature flags thing allows for any of the flavors to support as few or as many feature flags as they feel like they can backport to their version. It's a pretty nice way to handle the really fragmentary nature of ZFS support.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
Skandranon posted:At least they are trying to be supportive of their users, instead of cutting them off at the knees when they actually try to take advantage of the 'unlimited' plans offered. I appreciate Backblaze letting us know which drives they have problems with and such, but they make it impossible for me to actually use their service.   Yeah, they aren't kidding when they say unlimited, and the fact that they make it relatively easy to support NAS-type environments is the icing on the cake.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:
Just takes forever to upload. I was at 29 days for 2 months. Took 4 total to get 4Tb done with speeds starting at 12Mbit and ending at 2.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 03:50
|
|
|
Hughlander posted:Just takes forever to upload. I was at 29 days for 2 months. Took 4 total to get 4Tb done with speeds starting at 12Mbit and ending at 2. Is it their incoming speeds that are so limited? I decided to get serious about offsite after a storm killed the onboard NIC in my N54L (and *everything* else in the house connected to an ethernet cable) I was planning to park the NAS at my grandparents house and Crashplan off their sweet, sweet, totally-wasted gigabit upload for a few days. Bad plan?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 04:54
|
|
|
Hughlander posted:Just takes forever to upload. I was at 29 days for 2 months. Took 4 total to get 4Tb done with speeds starting at 12Mbit and ending at 2. Yeah, I've had Crashplan for years now. It usually seems to throttle to about half my upload, but I only have 5Mbps upstream anyway so I am not a good test case.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 05:57
|
|
|
eddiewalker posted:Is it their incoming speeds that are so limited? Given the estimate was literally weeks at the same value, I assumed it was a straight up look at how much is done is left and throttle at the application protocol level.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 15:23
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:Yeah, I've had Crashplan for years now. It usually seems to throttle to about half my upload, but I only have 5Mbps upstream anyway so I am not a good test case. I upload at ~14Mbps out of 20Mbps with CrashPlan. But when I had to restore 3 terabytes of data, I was downloading at less than 1 megabyte a second 
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
space marine todd posted:I upload at ~14Mbps out of 20Mbps with CrashPlan.  It'd be faster having a service agreement with Iron Mountain getting DLO tapes back from their vault. 
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
8-bit Miniboss posted:
Faster, maybe, but a LOT more expensive.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 21:49
|
|
|
8-bit Miniboss posted:
Haha yeah, but it worked perfectly at the end of the day. I got all my data back. It just took weeks.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 22:25
|
|
|
Your RTO is probably not that stringent when trying to recover anything in home storage disaster recovery situations. It's just that I have a hard time thinking of anything other than mass media storage that would require 3TB of recovery.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 00:16
|
|
|
Another backup related question: I've currently got a 3TB external drive. What are the pros/cons of me using it over spending another $400 and getting a Synology unit (probably a DS215j) (other than mirroring and power consumption?) Also, will something like Veeam or FreeFileSync have an issue with my external drive if the PC it's connected to is sleeping? I assume it wouldn't be a problem if I'm backing up that PC, but if I want to backup from a laptop on the network while the desktop PC is sleeping, will it wake the PC/external drive to do the backup? Finally, I've got a tower that is always on acting as a media server. Can the DS215j handle that well, and can it serve as a Plex server, or is that too much for the device? I don't run Plex at the moment, but it is a future consideration, so I don't want to limit myself right out of the gate.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 15:52
|
|
|
If you arn't transcoding it can work as a plex server.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 15:55
|
|
|
berzerkmonkey posted:Another backup related question: I've currently got a 3TB external drive. What are the pros/cons of me using it over spending another $400 and getting a Synology unit (probably a DS215j) (other than mirroring and power consumption?) Cons are it's working over USB, which is pretty slow, especially for many small read/writes. Requires whatever it's connected to to be on to work. Likely poor thermal conditions for the drive inside. External drives tend to be poor quality as well. Don't discount having some redundancy. You'll be sorry (or maybe not, then you can ignore me) when that drive dies and takes with it everything. Even if your data is recoverable (download it again), it can be a hassle and take awhile. Good redundancy is as much about saving you grief as it is about protecting your data. Pros are you already have it, and costs no additional money. berzerkmonkey posted:Also, will something like Veeam or FreeFileSync have an issue with my external drive if the PC it's connected to is sleeping? I assume it wouldn't be a problem if I'm backing up that PC, but if I want to backup from a laptop on the network while the desktop PC is sleeping, will it wake the PC/external drive to do the backup? No, not automatically. You could configure the server to use Wake on LAN, if your network card supports it. I would suggest you just leave your backup destination always on. It's the power cycles that usually add wear to a drive, not how long it is kept spinning. The Synology would also effectively be always on, and probably more power efficient than an entire PC berzerkmonkey posted:Finally, I've got a tower that is always on acting as a media server. Can the DS215j handle that well, and can it serve as a Plex server, or is that too much for the device? I don't run Plex at the moment, but it is a future consideration, so I don't want to limit myself right out of the gate. Really depends what you want from the server. The DS215j you mention only has room for 2 drives, and that's not much for $400. You could turn your current media server into a better one by adding some drives and redundancy.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
I'm entertaining the idea of piecing together a relatively cheap home NAS, using FreeNAS OS, with 1-2GB of usable space (~4GB total). However, I'm running into a snag. ECC vs Non-ECC memory. Unfortunately, this a bit of a deal breaker, at least for now, since it knocks my budget out of the novelty range. I had planned on getting a cheap yet NAS recommended mobo (around $50) with SATA support x4, a low end compatible processor (around $50) and 8gb of RAM. Maybe a low volume SSD for extra caching. I've already factored in 4x WD Red 3.5" 1TB HDDs in the cost and I have a case that would be perfect for this build (Fractal Design R4). The purpose for the NAS would be for home business files (financial records, Photoshop files, excel spreadsheets, etc), allowing quick access across OS platforms (windows/Mac OS/Linux) as well as home entertainment (movies, music). Right now we're using Google drive but would like to have more personal control over this, especially when moving large files. Considering I have the bare minimum command line knowledge, and a set budget, should I just forget about it or would it be feasible for me to build a small home NAS for two users under $500?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2015 03:04
|
|
|
inkblottime posted:Considering I have the bare minimum command line knowledge, and a set budget, should I just forget about it or would it be feasible for me to build a small home NAS for two users under $500? Have you met my friend the TS140? For under $300 you get a complete and very competent NAS. Yeah, it only comes with 4GB RAM stock, but that's really plenty if all you're planning on serving is a few TB (and another 4GB ECC RAM is only about $10 more expensive than 4GB of non-ECC). The E3-1225v3 is quite a bit better than whatever other CPU you were eyeballing for $50, that's for sure. The real question is why 4x1TB drives? Assuming something like RAIDZ 1, 4x1TB costs you about $240 and gets you 3TB usable, or $80/TB. 3x2TB costs you about $288 and gets you 4TB usable, or $72/TB, which increases your usable space by 33% at a cost of 18% ($44). A simple RAID 1 of 2x3TB costs you about $240, still gets you the same 3TB usable, but with lower power use, and less chance for drive failure. Going with 4 drives also maxes out the TS140, though your Fractal case obviously would have more room. Either way, you can get the TS140 + $240ish of drives for about $530. Slightly above your budget, but a lot more powerful, capable, and easier (since the computer all comes pre-assembled) than a roll-your-own. Also, something like FreeNAS requires zero CLI interaction, so that shouldn't be a concern unless you really want it to be. FreeNAS will happily serve as your storage controller, and has Plex as an officially supported plug-in, so it takes all of like 5 clicks to set up.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2015 06:28
|
|
|
DrDork posted:Also, something like FreeNAS requires zero CLI interaction, so that shouldn't be a concern unless you really want it to be. FreeNAS will happily serve as your storage controller, and has Plex as an officially supported plug-in, so it takes all of like 5 clicks to set up. Hey, thanks for that. I had been looking at Plex for my media needs and was happy to see it included in FreeNAS plug-in support. And this does answer my concerns about going over budget for ECC ram so I may have to wait and keep my options open, which is fine since I'll have more time to research and learn about NAS systems. How's the motherboard in the TS140 compared to other ECC supported boards like Supermicro and ASRock? Will it play nice with common connectors if it were swapped out to a different case?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2015 08:03
|
|
|
inkblottime posted:How's the motherboard in the TS140 compared to other ECC supported boards like Supermicro and ASRock? Will it play nice with common connectors if it were swapped out to a different case? The TS140 uses a PSU with a proprietary connector, and power for the drives comes straight from the motherboard using a weird 4pin>SATA power connector. http://www.jonkensy.com/lenovo-ts140-as-esxi-and-nas-box-with-a-twist/ It's not impossible to transfer it to a different case, mind you, but you'll either have to make your own power adapter cable or buy one for twenty bucks. You also won't have to rely on getting drive power from the motherboard at that point. If you don't need room for extra drives or easy access to them if you're going to be poking around in there a lot, the stock enclosure and PSU are surprisingly decent. The PSU doesn't seem to be a cheap afterthought and is 80 Plus Bronze compliant, and the whole thing is dead silent. I'm especially anal retentive about computer noise, and we're able to have it right next to our sofa without anyone even noticing.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2015 08:23
|
|
|
inkblottime posted:How's the motherboard in the TS140 compared to other ECC supported boards like Supermicro and ASRock? Will it play nice with common connectors if it were swapped out to a different case? Quite frankly, the biggest things you lose out on compared to a $200+ X10 Supermicro board is 1 NIC vs 2, and 4 SATA ports vs 6+. If you go with 2x3TB drives instead of 4x1TB, you can still have some room for expansion without even needing to transplant it into a different case. For the money, the TS140 is a stupidly good deal. Some people also say Lenovo's technical support is also crap, but I doubt you'd get much useful out of calling up ASRock or Supermicro to bitch about your custom-designed whitebox, either.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2015 08:51
|
|
|
This is great information and sounds like it's exactly what I need. Thanks guys! By the way, Best Buy is having a sale on WD Red 3TB drives: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/wd-red-3tb-internal-sata-nas-storage-oem-bare-drive-black-silver/7830208.p?id=1218861012643&skuId=7830208 Almost the same price as 2TB. Edit: How does the i3 version of the TS140 compare? Considering it's a small home server and all. Amazon has one for almost $50 less. Although with tax being a factor it may be a wash. inkblottime fucked around with this message at 19:12 on May 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
inkblottime posted:Edit: How does the i3 version of the TS140 compare? Considering it's a small home server and all. Amazon has one for almost $50 less. Although with tax being a factor it may be a wash. An i3 would do alright for a home server assuming you only have one or maybe two people using it at a given time. It would be less able to do VMs (ESXi, etc) should you feel the itch to do so, though. Also note that the NewEgg one I linked with the Xeon has a MIR bringing it down to $290, so only $15 more (plus/minus tax, depending on your location). Hell, if you really wanted to, you could get the Xeon one, pull the CPU, sell it on eBay for $150-$175, buy a i3-4150 for $110, and pocket the $40 or so difference. I'd just take the Xeon, though.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2015 21:07
|
|
|
inkblottime posted:This is great information and sounds like it's exactly what I need. Thanks guys! I have the Xeon 1225 version, it is rock solid. I have 16GB of ECC RAM in mine and the SATA ports I've solved by using a M1015 SAS adapter flashed to IT mode. It works swimmingly.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 01:50 |
|
|
Kind of wishing I got the higher end model (I got hte i3) but it is doing well. I feel like I should get more RAM. Can I mix ECC and non-ECC. I probably shouldn't. What ram would be compatible?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 05:12
|
|