Build advice - home media server with redundancy

[Pie]

Hi,

I'm building a home media server to replace my aging Acer H340 and I'd like to add a bit of redundancy. I use the server to stream media to my AppleTV2 running XBMC off of an FTP server (which I'll probably switch to NFS). The data isn't critical since the important stuff is backed up in two other places (this will be the third for that stuff). I'm thinking that RAIDZ (as opposed to RAIDZ2) is good enough for my needs since it's better than nothing (what I have now).

Here's my current thought process. Am I missing anything?

Case - Fractal Design Node 304 (http://www.ncix.com/products/?sku=75056)
MB - ASUS P8H77-I (http://www.ncix.com/products/?sku=71117&promoid=1338)
RAM - Kingston HyperX Blu Black Series 16GB (http://www.ncix.com/products/?sku=78420&promoid=1338)
CPU - Intel Core i3 3220T (http://www.ncix.com/products/?sku=75432)
PSU - Corsair CX Series CX500M (http://www.ncix.com/products/?sku=78576&promoid=1338)
HDD - 3x Western Digital WD Caviar Green 3TB (http://www.ncix.com/products/?sku=62178&promoid=1338)

The Case/MB/PSU can support 6 drives so I'm thinking I could create another zpool/vdev in the future with 3x3TB if I need more space.

Thanks! :)

 

[RotsiserMho]

If the data isn't critical why bother with the redundancy? Also, you may want to go with even more RAM. ZFS needs at least 1GB/actual TB to be effective and you'll probably want more headroom than 4GB.

 

[paleoN]

The Case/MB/PSU can support 6 drives so I'm thinking I could create another zpool/vdev in the future with 3x3TB if I need more space.

Bite the bullet now and get 6x3TB drives in raidz2. IMHO, raidz1 is a poor fit for drives this size period. 6 x drives is an aligned raidz2 config and pairs well with the 3TB drives. You should keep in mind the downtime, the joy of restoring from backups, how long it will take to refill the NAS when something bad happens and what your time is worth. Particularly, as your data grows all of these increase.

Your 16GB of RAM should be fine.

If the data isn't critical why bother with the redundancy?

Because Pie isn't stupid?

 

[RotsiserMho]

Because Pie isn't stupid?

Doesn't mean it's not worth re-evaluating the situation, especially if it's a tertiary copy.

 

[cyberjock]

Doesn't mean it's not worth re-evaluating the situation, especially if it's a tertiary copy.

WHAT!? Pie has 3x3TB drives(9TB total). The FreeNAS manual recommends 6GB + 1GB for each TB of storage. So for pie you'd want 15GB. His post says 16GB.

So please enlighten both protosd and myself and explain how he needs more RAM than what he already has?

 

[RotsiserMho]

WHAT!? Pie has 3x3TB drives(9TB total). The FreeNAS manual recommends 6GB + 1GB for each TB of storage. So for pie you'd want 15GB. His post says 16GB.

So please enlighten both protosd and myself and explain how he needs more RAM than what he already has?

My response was in reply to paleoN's comment on mine about redundancy. My question to OP is whether or not a RAID is actually needed given this is the third copy of the data.


My apologies for calculating the RAM requirement wrong. I somehow read 3x4TB meaning at least 12GB leaving 4GB on top of that. He also said he may expand the array in the future. Thanks for pointing out that the manual actually says 6GB.


I'm new to this community and am just trying to help since no one else had replied. No need to be hostile.

 

[cyberjock]

haha. I made the same mistake you did. I thought he was referring to the RAM comment. My appologies to you too!

 

[Pie]

Sorry about the late reply. I would have replied sooner but I accidentally double posted (why is there no "delete post" button?) and got banned for a day. Welcome to FreeNas! ;)

If the data isn't critical why bother with the redundancy?

Because it sucks to lose data. It's not a cache for anything temporary, it's stuff I care about. However, if I lost it then I could go on with life quite easily. It would just suck a bit.

Bite the bullet now and get 6x3TB drives in raidz2. IMHO, raidz1 is a poor fit for drives this size period. 6 x drives is an aligned raidz2 config and pairs well with the 3TB drives. You should keep in mind the downtime, the joy of restoring from backups, how long it will take to refill the NAS when something bad happens and what your time is worth. Particularly, as your data grows all of these increase.

Hmm, I've been thinking about this too. What I like about this approach is that it's "set it and forget it". I shouldn't ever need to worry about this NAS once it's set up because it'll be massive and doubly redundant. The cost is a bit of a factor since it'll add another $500 or so to the price. It'll bring down the overall cost per TB which is nice.

Doesn't mean it's not worth re-evaluating the situation, especially if it's a tertiary copy.

It's a tertiary copy for my critical data, not the other stuff.

I'm new to this community and am just trying to help since no one else had replied. No need to be hostile.

Thank you for replying! :)

 

[Pie]

The Case/MB/PSU can support 6 drives so I'm thinking I could create another zpool/vdev in the future with 3x3TB if I need more space.

Is there a downside to creating another zpool in the future that has 3x3TB RAIDZ vdev?

 

[cyberjock]

Only the added cost of another redundant disk. It's like this.. which is better? 2 vdevs of 3x3TB in RAIDZ or 1 vdev of 6x3TB in RAIDZ2. The RAIDZ2 is better for reliability because any 2 disks can fail and you lose nothing. With 2 vdevs 2 disks in the same vdev is game over for the entire zpool.

Plus, alot of people screw up their attempt to add a vdev and stripe the drives(no redundancy). Once you've added a drive to the pool, even if you don't change anything on the zpool there is no undoing it. 2 people in this forum have made this mistake just this month!

 

[Pie]

Plus, alot of people screw up their attempt to add a vdev and stripe the drives(no redundancy). Once you've added a drive to the pool, even if you don't change anything on the zpool there is no undoing it. 2 people in this forum have made this mistake just this month!

But I can easily have two zpools with one 3x3TB RAIDZ1 vdev each, right? I'm definitely leaning towards 3x3TB RAIDZ1 because I really don't think I'll need the space and 1 drive redundancy is better than the 0 drive redundancy I have now. It's also non-critical data so if I did lose it, oh well, who cares.