File Server / NAS

[sandiegoislandboy]

i want to build a file server rather than buying an off-the-shelf NAS. my question is where is the bottleneck of performance?

the file server is only going to be accessed by at most 5 computers, not going to be used to stream any media.

i have an amd duron 700mhz and p3 1.0ghz, both boards using pc100/133 sdram.

i want to use sata 3.0gb/s drives but know if i use the older computers i would have to get a sata controller card. going with a sata controller card with the older cpu/ram, how much of a performance loss would i see?

my other option was to build a cheap computer (amd 3800+ or intel e2160 with a board that has features onboard, 1 or 2gb ram, and hard drives).

where should i put my money towards?

my budget is about $500-$600 including the hard drives.

originally i was looking at the Dlink DNS-323 with two 500gb drives (thats my budget limit) but wanted to see if there was anything better in the same price range.

 

[Madwand1]

With 100 Mb/s networking, the network is the bottleneck, capping large file transfers at around 10 MB/s.

With gigabit networking, everything but the network is usually the bottleneck, capping large file transfers at around 30 MB/s typically. Bottlenecks include the OS, drives, bus if PCI, and potentially the CPU in some cases.

Putting GbE networking and a storage controller on the same PCI bus will limit the overall performance, but you might still be able to hit the "30 MB/s" figure despite that. Forget about doing much higher though, and note that some old chipsets are known to have poor-performing PCI.

Modern CPUs are fairly cheap, as are modern motherboards with on-board video, SATA, and networking. One "gotcha" is when the networking is bridged via the PCI bus, but this is becoming less common with PCIe versions, and isn't all that important when little else is used on the PCI bus.

A key question is the choice of the OS. If you pick a *nix-based OS, look for platforms/devices with good driver support. *nix has advantages for OS-based RAID. If you don't go *nix, and are considering RAID for storage, I suggest sticking with Intel - ICH9R for example, G33/Q35 chipsets for example. Also consider rescuing a PCI graphics adapter from landfill -- this could get you some more flexibility with the motherboard.

 

[aigomorla]

Most definitely the bottleneck is in the nic card.



There isnt any way around it unless you want to run fiber cables. Which IMO wont be cost beneifical.

Ive been playing with my EVGA 680i reciently. Pulled it out of retirement. Used dual teaming feature on it, but you would need another 680i to pull it off. Then i believe you could pull 2gbits. But someone would really need to force me/threaten me to get another 680i.

Its THE most sorriest chipset i have ever worked with in terms of OCing, and long term stress stability.

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: aigomorla
Most definitely the bottleneck is in the nic card.

There isnt any way around it unless you want to run fiber cables. Which IMO wont be cost beneifical.

People new to gigabit think this sort of thing, which was fine in the days of 100 Mb/s networking, where the network was the bottleneck, but is generally not the case for gigabit networking.

 

[aigomorla]

interesting...

however, it seems windows can never get the thing to run at 100% gbit.

The most ive seen it was at 48%.


But very interesting. I think its a windows OS issue then. I cant use *.nix based OS. Reason is, i have all my rigs on remote though PCAnywhere. Makes my life a lot easier when you have 5 rigs online.