Setting up a File/Print/NAS Server, need some help/opinions

[Namuna]

Here's what I've got planned for building a File/Print/NAS Server. This is just for home use, basically to store/shared photos, music and videos. Sorry about this being the 3rd thread I've created about this setup, but this time I'm leaving the subject a little more general and I'll keep all my questions within this thread from now on...

Box:
P4/2.8ghz, 512mb ram, onboard SATA (2connectors), onboard gigabit NIC in a slimline case
Drives:
2, 400gb SATA drives on order. To be setup as RAID-0 (via OS software)
OS:
Planning to setup Win2k SP3

The questions:
1. As it is now, the slimline case can only support; 1xFloppy, 1xOptical, 1xHD. The floppy drive is an automatic toss. So now I'll have enough space for the 2x400gb and the CD/DVD drive (in case I need to load anything)...Should I just install the OS on the RAID? Or pop out the CD/DVD drive and pop an IDE drive in there to install the OS on?
2. Anyone have suggestions on setting up Power Savings/Sleep on the server? And is something like Wake-On-Lan used to bring it out of sleep?

That's what I've got for now, I'm sure I'll have more to ask, thanks for any help!.

 

[MustISO]

Only do RAID 0 is everything on there is expendable. One drive goes and you've lost everything.

 

[Madwand1]

AFAIK, there's no way to boot off Windows OS RAID, so the decision might be made for you. In any case, a separate drive for OS is generally a better idea.

 

[Namuna]

Originally posted by: MustISO
Only do RAID 0 is everything on there is expendable. One drive goes and you've lost everything.

I know. For anything really important it'll be archived over to DVD

Originally posted by: Madwand1
AFAIK, there's no way to boot off Windows OS RAID, so the decision might be made for you. In any case, a separate drive for OS is generally a better idea.

Ahh, well then, there's nothing like not having a choice to help you make a decision huh?

Thanks for the replies folks, much appreciated.

 

[imported_Tick]

Originally posted by: Madwand1
AFAIK, there's no way to boot off Windows OS RAID, so the decision might be made for you. In any case, a separate drive for OS is generally a better idea.

Uh, since when?

N/m. Didn't realize he was talking SoftRAID.

 

[Namuna]

Finally got the box up and running last night.

Started off will getting Win2k on the box, but I had some problems with getting the appropriate drivers so I rebuilt with WinXP...Had the SAME problems with the drivers (so the problem wasn't because of win2k) but I finally got things working and just decided to stay with XP.

So the box now has the following config:
- 1gb Memory (had some chips sitting around so I figured what the heck)
- 40gb IDE drive (Master on Primary) for the OS
- 2x400gb setup as Striped/RAID-0

When I was setting up the 400gigers, I noticed they were jumpered to run at 1.5gb/s (removing the jumper would let it rip at the 3.0gb/s speed). I imagine this is for compatibility issues? I shouldn't have any problems pulling of the jumpers and letting them run at rull bore right?

Now to find a gigabit switch !

Thanks for your help folks.

 

[Namuna]

Just wanted to throw a final chime in about the File/Print Server,

Received my 5port gigabit switch today (went with a Netgear GS605) and the transfers between my PC and the Server are now mooooovin right along!

Thanks again for all the bits of help folks.

 

[Philippine Mango]

Just an FYI, a decent gigabit ethernet switch will greatly improve your transfer rates. Also another thing to keep in mind is to increase the size of your 'frames' as the gigabit is so fast that it can be bogged down by the huge overhead of using the frames that are typical with 10/100 network setups. One way to know if your gigabit switch is doing a poor job is jus to run a direct link from computer to computer, copy a huge file over, once with the switch in place and once with the direct link and you may find that your speeds improve with a direct link.

 

[imported_Dekard]

I've got to tell you, its suicide to run raid 0 in a file server... There's just no reason, even with a gigabit network. The chances of loosing your data are just so much higher. You'd be better to run your system in raid 1 and have a extremely low chance of loosing your data. Heck, you'd be better with no raid at all than raid 0...

If you need the capacity so bad then sell off the overpowered p4 your using and the silly slim line case. Get a p2 or p3, or old athlon, toss in no more than 256 ram, a great psu, a good raid card and the right drives.

I suggest either:

3 x 400g in raid 5, total capacity would be 745g and you'd have great performance and reliability.

OR

2 x 400g NO RAID, total capacity would be 745g, decent performance and reliability.

File servers are not gaming machines. You have built a gaming machine and are using it for a file server... Its just a bad idea, I'm sorry.

ps, here's some additional reading for you. http://www.overclockingwiki.org/index.php?title=What_Raid_Can_and_Can_Not_Do

 

[Madwand1]

Congrats. Instead of fooling around with different RAID setups, I'd suggest getting an external backup for at least the critical stuff first. Once you have an external backup, you can fool around changing RAID configurations as much as you like, as "RAID is not a backup".

Yes, RAID 5 is a better idea than RAID 0 for a file server, but an external backup is an even better idea -- it will handle a greater number of failure cases, assuming you populate the backup.