buy a high end NAS or build my own conroe based system?

[weebroonieuk]

im going to go down the route of NAS shortly and consolodate all my files that are scattered between drives, and not even backed up

i would like something like the thecus 5200 but i reckon id be aswell buying a decent mobo with lots of sata ports (atleast 6) and the cheapest conroe cpu

i know that may well be overkill to some people but i like the advanced power management of the conroes and using something like xp i can happily install newer goodies for managing the speed and power consumption and the drives power up and power down , mind you that could be tricky considering the raid controller fools the os into seeing 2 drives as one etc .....

im clueless with linux and dont really have the time to learn it i need something plain and simple and xp is simple enough for everyone including me

i reckon i will start with a coupla of 750gb drives and raid1 them as i reckon it will be easier to upgrade capacity when i need to buy just putting in another pair of drives and raid1 them too and just create another shared drive or does anyone know of a better way ? theres so many raid options .....

also when i build this i will be buying an 8 or most likely 16 port GB switch and putting them in the same big cupboard alot of these new mobo's come with this dual GB ethernet links and my current a8n32sli does this im sure would that mean i get more throughput if i had to put 2 cables from pc to switch and my diy nas to switch ? or does it only work if you directly connect the dual GBethernet links?

any other suggestions are more than welcome before i start ordering all the stuff to build it up

[directhex]

buy a nas box. xp's no server.

[dave87]

Depends what you would use it for - if its only serving files then a NAS box would do fine

If its more, then the low end conroe system may hold merit, just not running xp

[weebroonieuk]

i knew id get hissed at for saying xp for serving

is there anything else thats easy enough for me to use and install things too ?

the unit may be used for other tasks id prefer the conroe route for this reason plus you cant beat the flexibility your own box gives i reckon i could build something to atleast equal the thecus in performance and most likely beat it plus i can always add and upgrade things hardware wise or change os's for newer functions and protocols if i feel like it

the only merit the thecus seems to have is obviously its purpose built status and looks quite good in my oppinion but since it will be put in a spare cupboard and so will a printer and ethernet switch then im not too fussed id rather have nice big 120mm fans blowing as fast as possible over the drives without me being able to hear them when im trying to sleep

[DR]

I have a 5200 - I could have a Conroe - I could have a Quad Core as my File Server.....

.. The 5200 is a nippy little beast and has incredible stability - the built in Apps make a different too

Remeber Thecus = Built to be a NAS box

It's like people who have "servers" at home - I've got a couple of boxes which are real servers - server grade hardware doing server tasks- Exchange and a Fileserver.

The Thecus is a perfect box to use for NAS - turn on and forget - I have it on my desk for the RoutSTOR in the back - and the USB functionality Its not too loud - and it has eSATA too

[Zak33]

looking very nas to me matey..... very nas from people who know and use them.

[weebroonieuk]

i know but i will come up with a free core 2 duo when i upgrade my new laptop once i order it as i will be getting a top end rock laptop and im going to order with the slowest cpu and upgrade and it works out cheaper than buying the cpu from them in the first place

i just dont know if i can justify the cost of the nas box which is looking to be on the wrong side of 600 and all it will ever do is be a nas box which i know sounds silly but if theres a decent os with an easy gui then id happily build that because i know i could build something with better drive cooling and alot more flexible aswell and i dont think it would consume that much more than the thecus once properly setup

and if i needed better raid usage would i be able to install the like of a decent raid card ? i know those can get expensive especially when adding ram for the cache but i can do it if i want to but i doubt my fileserving will ever be that demanding ..... who knows....

im gonna get

[tfboy]

I recently had the same dilemna and went down the PC running as a NAS box route, simply because I didn't fancy spending £££ on just a NAS box.

I recycled my old Athlon XP1700+, installed WS2003 (although I was thinking of going XP - why not?)

You can get a 5 port SATA RAID card from Scan (clicky) for £40 odd.

Not sure if adding the cost of a new conroe system works out cheaper than a Thecus box, but in my case, as I was recycling, it was. I just spent about £50 to get the SATA card and a PCI GbE card to get me going

I have nothing against a Thecus box, they sound great and no doubt are well built, but having an OS-driven serving box gives you much more flexibility, particularly if you want to have an FTP server or other services running...

[weebroonieuk]

yeh well thats what i was thinking im very handy with windows and clueless with other os's

server 03 is quite good its just xp with less services enabled and some different ones enabled relating to its role and i think it uses a different theme , no doubt there is alot more too it than that but thats all i noticed in my short test run with it

i have various computery bits like cases and beefy power supplies so all im really going to be shelling out for is the mobo cpu and ram , and possibly a cheap video card if the board i choose doesnt support it, there is lots of decent boards with betweem 6 and 10 sata ports for a reasonableish price.

i love the looks of the thecus but i have to factor out that plus point as i will never be looking at it aslong as its running well

how long was your longest uptime ? and do you leave it running 24/7 ?

[tfboy]

Uhm, I've only just installed it, so no real uptime to report.

Up till now, I've been using my main XP pro machine. This is my "dekstop" PC which also runs all the services such as FTP which I have going.

Even using it to play games and stuff, I've had I think 7 weeks continuous uptime without a reboot, so not bad considering it's a "desktop" OS and running games and other stuff which pushes memory / CPU usage

In my field of work, we use servers and workstations running 2k3 and XP and it's 6 months to 1 year between reboots, so I can't see having to use XP being an issue, as long as you install it streamlined, and do decent housekeeping.

In my experience, my worst enemy has been applications which have some leaky memory, using up all my ram forcing me to restart.

[weebroonieuk]

yes well im a firm beleiver of nliteing my xp install disc before the actual install

aslong as it could last a month atleast id be more than happy because i like to do the housekeeping now and then so wouldnt mind a bit of downtime or even scheduling disk cleanup and defrag and some other utilities to keep it running sweet finsihed of with a restart would be quite handy

i wont be at the machine physically very much but i would like to be able to control it over the lan with my laptop for general noseying about and checking the systems vitals and performing some random tasks without getting up of my throne and actually going to the server itself

[DR]

But remember - it's a desktop PC - not a server.

[weebroonieuk]

its main use will be serving files so server it is to me!

[TheAnimus]

XP has crippingly limitations built into to stopping it from been used as an on mass server.

[DR]

I'm just trying to help....

[weebroonieuk]

is server 2003 better ? how does it stack up to win 2000? performance wise im not bothered as it will hardly be stressed very much and will have a conroe based system so sufficient grunt for my small needs

what one is solid enough but provides plenty of driver and application support ?

im guessing server 2003 is most compatable but i remember messing with it couple of years back and you had to full some of your programs into thinking it was xp because things like firewalls and av would not work and make you buy the corporate edition even if you were only a single user workstation .....