Linux Server (NAS)

[oimi]

TAKTAK, I'm still waiting for your list!

[Singh400]

TAKTAK, I'm still waiting for your list!

TakTak lists.

[oimi]

So if I base some of my hardware on the design above, will this be energy efficient?

For server:
Cooler Master Dominator 690 PC Case With Window / Black @ £67.99 Inc VAT
Supermicro C2SEE G43, S775, DDR3 1333MHz, SATA II, ATX, On Board VGA @ £114.97 Inc VAT
BX80557E1200 - Intel Celeron Dual Core E1200, Socket 775, 1.6GHz, 512KB Cache, Retail @ £39.04 Inc VAT
Kingston 2gb Kit (2x1gb) Ddr3 1066mhz Memory Non-ecc Cl7 Dimm @ £35.30 Inc VAT
Adaptec 1430SA x4 Port SATA II (300mbps) PCI-E Raid Card *Oem* @ £82.56 Inc VAT
Edimax EW-7728IN / PCI Wireless N WiFi Card / 300mbps / 802.11n @ £27.99 Inc VAT
Corsair 400W CX PSU - 12cm DBB Fan 80%Plus Certified Efficiency 6x SATA 1x PCI-E @ £45.23 Inc VAT

I'm also going to need some LONG CAT5E cable to run from the PC to the router and to the server.

For my PC:
ANT24-0501c - Dlink ANT24-0501C Omni-Directional 5DBi Indoor Antenna (RP-SMA Female) Extends range upto 300m @ £12.85 Inc VAT

[oimi]

Just to clarify, the antenna for the PC is provided for access to my PC using the laptop.

[peterb]

Not quite sure wy you need a wireless card if you are going to connect to the router via Cat5. The laptop will connect to the wireless router that you mentioned in the first post.

I can't help thinking you are making a meal of this, for what is essentially a file server. Five years ago I threw together a PC to gain some Linux experience using an Asus bare bones system and an AMD 1.4 Ghz socket A processor. That now acts as a file server, a mail server, and a public webserver. It takes about 105 Watts when it is running. I added a simple RAID controller for RAID 1 and a low cost UPS for resiliance. The whoile set up probably cost about £300. I did add a Gigabit Lan card to the computers on the wired system to speed up file transfers.

I back up across the network to a tape drive (that is the expensive bit) but you could back up the DVD or Blu ray (also expensive at the moment).

Hot swapping is only genearlly of use for servers when uptime is paramount when you can hot swap a failing drive out of an array without poewering down.. You might find that useful for an external SATA drive if you are using that for backup, but I wouldn't bother - just use a drive in a USB2 caddy and back to that - if you must back up to a hard drive.

[Singh400]

Not quite sure wy you need a wireless card if you are going to connect to the router via Cat5. The laptop will connect to the wireless router that you mentioned in the first post.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure I said the same thing. TBH can't remember as this thread has been going on for ages.

I can't help thinking you are making a meal of this, for what is essentially a file server. Five years ago I threw together a PC to gain some Linux experience using an Asus bare bones system and an AMD 1.4 Ghz socket A processor. That now acts as a file server, a mail server, and a public webserver. It takes about 105 Watts when it is running. I added a simple RAID controller for RAID 1 and a low cost UPS for resiliance. The whoile set up probably cost about £300. I did add a Gigabit Lan card to the computers on the wired system to speed up file transfers.

Ahhh nice, I really should get into linux. I've got a pair of old/ancient machines that would be perfect linux testbeds.

I back up across the network to a tape drive (that is the expensive bit) but you could back up the DVD or Blu ray (also expensive at the moment).

Oooo, show off. Tape drive eh?

Hot swapping is only genearlly of use for servers when uptime is paramount when you can hot swap a failing drive out of an array without poewering down.. You might find that useful for an external SATA drive if you are using that for backup, but I wouldn't bother - just use a drive in a USB2 caddy and back to that - if you must back up to a hard drive.

Yup hot swapping is of no use in a home server role.

[oimi]

Not quite sure wy you need a wireless card if you are going to connect to the router via Cat5. The laptop will connect to the wireless router that you mentioned in the first post..

Yeah, I'm pretty sure I said the same thing. TBH can't remember as this thread has been going on for ages.

Just to clarify, the antenna for the PC is provided for access to my PC using the laptop.

When I first set it up, it will be easiest to create a wireless network.

So what are your thoughts about the listed hardware anyway?

[Singh400]

Just to clarify, the antenna for the PC is provided for access to my PC using the laptop.

You have a wireless router right? Your laptop is able to connect to the internet via the router, yes? Your desktop PC is wired into the router, right?

Then if you wire your home server into the router, then all 3 devices will be able to connect and interact with each other via the router.

[oimi]

Excellent, now what about hardware in terms of suitability and efficiency?

[peterb]

When I first set it up, it will be easiest to create a wireless network.

Not really - Wired networks are much easier to set up than wireless - just plug in and go. Wireless there is the faff of setting up encryption etc, and Wireless networks on Linux systems can be a bit hit and miss - a lot depends on the card and whether drivers are available for them. And as has been said (many times) you will take a massive operformance hit anyway - and for a file server LAN and disk performance is the most important criteria.

So what are your thoughts about the listed hardware anyway?

Overkill IMHO. File serving s not a demanding application. As I said, I use a simple Socket A based AMD to do that, and run Postfix (mailserver) and Apache (Webserver). All you need is a low end processor and mobo, and a case with enough hard drive space in it. Mobo and processor you could probably do for around £120, add a case for about £25 and a decent PSU (about £40) and jobs done. A low end processor will use less power as well.

Oooo, show off. Tape drive eh?

I bought it after I nearly suffered catastophic data loss (on a RAID 1 system) and was faced with a £350+ bill from a data recovery service. In the event I recovered everything myself, but as I was prepared to pay that, it seemed silly not to pay a bit more and get a decent backup system and avoid the risk in future. (And of course emphasised the point that RAID is NOT a substitute for backing up .

Excellent, now what about hardware in terms of suitability and efficiency?

As above - Overkill

[Singh400]

I'd try to source all the parts from one supplier, ideally Scan.

Also, can't help but feel that you are going a bit over the top with the motherboard. Something cheaper would be fine. £115 for a home server motherboard is overkill I think. Plenty of cheaper, and smaller options out there.

Everything else is fine.

[peterb]

This (or similar)

http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/Asus-...roductFeatures

Would be more than capable of doing what you want. Add in a low end processor, memory and DVD/Blu ray disc and its done. The real limitation is that lack of drive bays, but you can get two drives in there (with a 3.5" to 2.25" adapter) You might also want consider a better PSU (FSP do one that would fit) - and for RAID, don't bother with the mobo raid or a RAID controller, use the software raid built into many Linux Distros. However there is an expansion slot if you do want to use a RAID controller. Remember RAID is not a substitute for back up.

[oimi]

The motherboard I listed was good for a number of reasons; the number of USB slots (with two internally connected to the motherboard for possibility of running OS from a thumb drive), the number of SATA connectors, the onboard graphics card (reduced power consumption), built in LAN and so on... I just want the right efficiency/power balance for reasonably optimum file transfer performance.

I will look into external backup solutions seperately.

[Singh400]

The motherboard I listed was good for a number of reasons; the number of USB slots (with two internally connected to the motherboard for possibility of running OS from a thumb drive), the number of SATA connectors, the onboard graphics card (reduced power consumption), built in LAN and so on... I just want the right efficiency/power balance for reasonably optimum file transfer performance.

I will look into external backup solutions seperately.

The P5QL-CM has all that, and is mATX. You can get it for around £70.

With my setup, I peak at a transfer rate of 72 MB/s.

[peterb]

How many disk drives and USB ports do you need? The more disk drives you have the more power you use. Do you need more than two drives? Do you need more than 4 USB connectors? Its a server - it sits in the corner - serving. Why run the OS from a thumb drive? There is little point - the OS won't take up much space on the hard drive - and if you use LVM you get max flexibility anyway.

[oimi]

How many disk drives and USB ports do you need? The more disk drives you have the more power you use. Do you need more than two drives? Do you need more than 4 USB connectors? Its a server - it sits in the corner - serving. Why run the OS from a thumb drive? There is little point - the OS won't take up much space on the hard drive - and if you use LVM you get max flexibility anyway.

Well the idea is that I want 2TB of usable space for storage of documents, music etc and some form of RAID setup for additional security. Then, I want additional space to backup image files of my PC so that I can recover without reinstalling anything. I also want to make backup images of the laptop and server.

As well as setting up a RAID array, I will have seperate storage in the form of an external backup drive which will also backup my files.

In total, including the drives currently installed in my PC I own:
6 x 1TB HDDs
2 x 750GB HDDs
2 x 500GB HDDs

What I want is seperate HDDs for the operating system on the PC and file server, which obviously need to be a lot smaller than those listed above. The HDD for the PC would need to be a little bit bigger for installation of games, image editing applications etc.

I wasn't actively seeking that many USB connections, it was just a bonus.

LVM - Linux Virtual Machine? What's the point in running a virtual copy of Linux? That would require me to install a version of Windows or something else first in order to run that.