Build check: first FreeNAS build

[dmitri_t]

Hi all,

I'm considering the following build. I'm looking specifically for places where I've cut too many corners, or places where I haven't cut enough corners (and could save some money). Specifically, pcpartpicker told me that some C236 chipsets potentially need updating with an older CPU. Will this be a problem with my motherboard? Is there a way to find out before buying? I plan on having a RAIDZ1 vdev (12GB capacity) to start, and add a second if required. All my important documents are to be also backed up online. Thanks in advance for your help. I've read the HW guide and used that to inform my decisions, only the CPU and RAM aren't explicitly recommended, and I'd appreciate input on how crucial this is.

CPU: Intel - Celeron G3930 2.9GHz Dual-Core Processor ($47.00 @ Vuugo)
Motherboard: Supermicro - MBD-X11SSM-F-O Micro ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($256.99 @ PC-Canada)
Memory: Kingston - ValueRAM 16GB (1 x 16GB) DDR4-2400 Memory ($221.99 @ PC-Canada)
Storage: Western Digital - Red 4TB 3.5" 5400RPM Internal Hard Drive ($154.99 @ Newegg Canada)
Storage: Western Digital - Red 4TB 3.5" 5400RPM Internal Hard Drive ($154.99 @ Newegg Canada)
Storage: Western Digital - Red 4TB 3.5" 5400RPM Internal Hard Drive ($154.99 @ Newegg Canada)
Storage: Western Digital - Red 4TB 3.5" 5400RPM Internal Hard Drive ($154.99 @ Newegg Canada)
Case: Fractal Design - Node 804 MicroATX Mid Tower Case ($134.99 @ Newegg Canada)
Power Supply: Rosewill - 550W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply ($84.99 @ Newegg Canada)
Total: $1365.92

 

[Nick2253]

I'd say that your build looks really good. My comments are:

• Great choice on the case, but you might be able to find it cheaper without the window (I think it comes without a window?)
  
• 550W would be slightly undersized for 8 drives, so if you are definitely set on expanding to 8 drives, I would look at 600-650W.
• Excellent choice on the memory. That gives you good expansion opportunity for future.

 

[BigDave]

go with this cpu instead, I run it with the X11SSM-F out of the box.
Pentium G4400 Skylake Dual-core - 3.30 GHz
TIP: 400 MHz faster is alot when running FreeNAS with SBA shares

RAIDz1 not recommended with large capacity drives, this is due to super long resilver time. Search here in the forum for threads regarding this issue.

 

[Zredwire]

RAIDz1 not recommended with large capacity drives, this is due to super long resilver time. Search here in the forum for threads regarding this issue.

I agree with this. RAIDZ1 really is dead with today's large size drives.

 

[dmitri_t]

Thanks for your feedback, everyone. Is there a general guideline or calculator for what level of parity is required given a number of drives and their capacities? I haven't seen a guideline on that yet, and (an albeit brief) google search hasn't turned up anything helpful.

I appreciate all your help so far.

 

[Chris Moore]

Thanks for your feedback, everyone. Is there a general guideline or calculator for what level of parity is required given a number of drives and their capacities? I haven't seen a guideline on that yet, and (an albeit brief) google search hasn't turned up anything helpful.

I appreciate all your help so far.

This is the best capacity calculator I have found for ZFS: http://wintelguy.com/zfs-calc.pl
With 4TB drives, you will want to use RAID-z2 but to keep in the vicinity of the usable space of 12TB, you will need 6 drives (2 more) because there is more overhead used by ZFS than what you have accounted for in your space estimation. Also, if you actually plan to put a full 12TB of data in there, you should go ahead and throw another drive or two in the mix to begin with because the pool will really start to get slow when it starts to get full.
You want to stay under 80% utilization as a rule.
There is a very good section of this forum you should probably visit also:
https://forums.freenas.org/index.php?resources/

 

[Johnnie Black]

I'd say that your build looks really good. My comments are:

• 550W would be slightly undersized for 8 drives, so if you are definitely set on expanding to 8 drives, I would look at 600-650W.

IMO 550W is oversized for 8 disks, 450W is more than enough, my backup server has 10 disks with 450W, you'll be fine as long as it's a good quality single rail PSU.

 

[Nick2253]

IMO 550W is oversized for 8 disks, 450W is more than enough, my backup server has 10 disks with 450W, you'll be fine as long as it's a good quality single rail PSU.

I'm not going to engage in a PSU sizing debate, so I'm just going to leave this here: https://forums.freenas.org/index.php?threads/proper-power-supply-sizing-guidance.38811/

 

[Johnnie Black]

I'm not going to engage in a PSU sizing debate, so I'm just going to leave this here:

That guide uses a very high number for each disk, modern disks typically require 20W-25W for startup, still if you want to use the values in the guide you'll get no where close to 550W, much less more than that like you suggest:

8 x 35 (HDDs) + 25 (board) + 51 (CPU) + 6 (RAM) + lets say 30W for fans x 1.2 = 470W

WD Reds require 21.6W at startup, so a much more accurate value would be = 345W hence why 450W is more than enough.

I use 550W PSUs to power servers with 14 and 15 disks, the 14 disk one is all 7200rpm drives, my largest servers with 20/22 drives use 650W PSUs.

Obviously it's better to have more than required than less, but no need to exaggerate or the PSU will cost more and operate with less efficiency at lower loads.

 

[BigDave]

Obviously it's better to have more than required than less, but no need to exaggerate or the PSU will cost more and operate with less efficiency at lower loads.

I'm not trying to spark this debate again, just wanting
to provide a small sampling of the thread that was linked to by @Nick2253 just in case the OP did not read the opening post of that thread in it's entirety.

That statement (quoted above) has been debated many times, these two quotes (shown below) from @jgreco speaks largely about the pitfalls of attempting to maximize PSU efficiency.

"Power Supply Efficiency/Cost

There's a school of thought that wants to minimize the size of a PSU and instead rely on the manufacturer's competence and build quality. You CAN do this. I think it a fool's errand, but, yes, you can.

The last time I debated this with a supporter of this strategy, I ran some numbers. It turns out that if you run a 60W load on a SeaSonic G-360, efficiency is 86%, and watts consumed at the wall are 70W. If you run the same 60W load on a SeaSonic G-550, efficiency is 83%, and watts consumed at the wall are 72W. That's a two watt difference to move up to a power supply that supplies 50% more power. At a price of 14c/kWh, the additional electrical cost is about $12... over the next five years.

I am totally willing to pay $2 per year more in electricity for a larger supply that is more suitably sized and less likely to ruin my $1000+ NAS boxes. Trying to microsize your PSU is a game for chumps."

AND

"Further, because we want the power supply to work as well in five (or even ten) years as it does today, we have to consider that as components age, their ability to perform slowly degrades. This degradation is made worse if a component is stressed out to near (or past) its specification. In the world of electronics, we typically cope with this using a principle known as derating. This simply means that, for example, if you needed a supply that can deliver 300 watts, you get a 400 watt supply. A typical high quality modern power supply delivers a fairly consistent level of efficiency when loaded between 20%-80% of its rated capacity, so you're not "saving lots of power" by getting a 300 watt supply for a 300 watt load. The rule of thumb in the shop here is that a power supply should never be pushed beyond 80% of its rated capacity."

 

[jgreco]

It pleases me to no end that people bother to read what I write. Thanks guys. I know I'm around less than I used to be, but I am so happy to see that the trend of excellence in engineering lives on even in my absence.

 

[BigDave]

It pleases me to no end that people bother to read what I write. Thanks guys. I know I'm around less than I used to be, but I am so happy to see that the trend of excellence in engineering lives on even in my absence.

Your wit is entertaining, your Grinchyness presumed, you've had a profound affect on many,
so it's BigDave who's thanking You! ;)