Mini-ITX Build - FreeNAS compatible?

[lfg2000]

Hi everyone, first time posting here.

I want to build my first NAS, and I'd like to have your suggestions about it and if it would run FreeNas.

The specs:
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-J3455N-D3H (integrated Intel Celeron J3455).
RAM: 8GB DDR-3 SO-DIMM (planning to buy another 8GB module in the future).
PSU: FSP Group FSP250-50LC (80 Pluz Bronze Certified).
Case: ABLECOM CS-M50 Mini-ITX.
Discs: For now, I want to install 2x WD Red 8TB HDD (WD80EFZX)

It will serve mainly to store my big media collection (about 1TB of photos and RAW files and about 2TB of videos and RAW).
and as a Plex Server (1 or 2 1080p streams). I need now about 7TB of storage (was thinking about a RAID1). Let me know if more information is needed.

Could it run FreeNAS? What would I need to do if I need to expand my storage in the future? Hopefully, I can have some good advice for
a first build and something else you think could be useful to know.

Thanks in advance!

 

[Alecmascot]

Search the forums for J3455 and have a read........

 

[Constantin]

Motherboard hardware aside, I'm not sure why you'd bother with FreeNAS unless you had a bigger collection of hard drives? Or are you just trying to detect bit rot as it happens?

RAM also seems very constrained, I'd offer up at least 16GB.

 

[lfg2000]

Motherboard hardware aside, I'm not sure why you'd bother with FreeNAS unless you had a bigger collection of hard drives? Or are you just trying to detect bit rot as it happens?

RAM also seems very constrained, I'd offer up at least 16GB.

I'm planning to get the 16GB of RAM. Do you mean it has no sense to use FreeNAS for this current setup? I think I won't be using more than
4 drives in some years. I'd like to know your suggestions about the OS.

 

[danb35]

RAM: 8GB DDR-3 SO-DIMM (planning to buy another 8GB module in the future).

According to ark.intel.com, 8 GB is the max that CPU supports. That in itself makes it, at best, marginally suitable for use with FreeNAS. Unless Intel is lying again...

 

[Constantin]

For me, the primary reason to bother with all the idiosyncrasies of FreeNAS is the rock-solid underpinnings: ZFS detects bit rot, potential multi-drive failure redundancy is a good insurance policy, performance is pretty good.

With only two drives, just what will the array accomplish re: redundancy? Run them as mirrors? Rely on other backups? Why bother then with FreeNAS and not just have a consumer OS implement RAID1 and then go the plex route? Likely simpler to implement and relies just as much on a good backup strategy.

I use a multitude of much smaller drives (3TB) to achieve about 14TB of space with Z3 redundancy. That still requires backups, but the probability of the pool going down all at once should be pretty low. Power consumed by the drives is likely higher than your 2-drive array, however!

Also keep in mind that your FreeNAS pool should always be at least 20% empty. For a 7TB collection you hence should be looking at 10TB drives in a Mirror-1 configuration. If it was me, I'd be looking at a bunch of 4TB drives and a bigger case instead.

Put another way, unless you really need the bit rot feature, then a synology or similar consumer-grade NAS will likely be easier to set up and use than FreeNAS. To me, FreeNAS is a lot like an old fashioned truck gearbox vs. an 3-speed automatic. While having 20 gears to row through might allow you to do all sorts of cool stuff, it takes time to master. Plus, many folk prefer the simplicity of an automatic in every-day driving.

 

[Chris Moore]

This system is a bargain when it comes to the number of drive bays available and the amount of processing power and RAM available if you wanted to be able to run a few virtual machines.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Supermicro...-2-6ghz-8-Core-128gb-24-Bay-JBOD/232604715524

 

[danb35]

This system is a bargain when it comes to the number of drive bays available and the amount of processing power and RAM available

I'm sure it is. It's also nothing at all like the kind of system OP is talking about.

 

[Chris Moore]

I'm sure it is. It's also nothing at all like the kind of system OP is talking about.

But it is an awesome deal and I thought the OP might like to know what the options are. Maybe they were going for a small system thinking it would be cheaper?

According to ark.intel.com, 8 GB is the max that CPU supports. That in itself makes it, at best, marginally suitable for use with FreeNAS. Unless Intel is lying again...

Then there is the fact that what they are looking at is terribly underpowered for what they want to do.

It will serve mainly to store my big media collection (about 1TB of photos and RAW files and about 2TB of videos and RAW).
and as a Plex Server (1 or 2 1080p streams). I need now about 7TB of storage (was thinking about a RAID1). Let me know if more information is needed.

I would suggest that if you need 7TB now, you should use a RAIDz2 array consisting of 6 x 4TB drives to give you adequate storage for today and some little time to come

 

[danb35]

Maybe they were going for a small system thinking it would be cheaper?

Fair point. But it seems when I've seen folks looking for mini-ITX systems, it's because they're planning to put them in the living room.

 

[Chris Moore]

Fair point. But it seems when I've seen folks looking for mini-ITX systems, it's because they're planning to put them in the living room.

I would totally put my rack in the living room. ;-)

 

[danb35]

I would totally put my rack in the living room. ;-)

I might too, but SWMBO would have a thing or two to say about it...

 

[Constantin]

The supermicro chassis may be a bargain but it also nearly costs 10x of what the OP is currently budgeting for chassis, PSU, and motherboard. No doubt it is far more capable... and if I needed 24 spinning disk storage, this sort of case would be on my watch list.

But the OP wants to implement a simple Mirror-1 with just 8-10 TB of pool space. A FreeNAS Mini or Mini XL is a better fit even if costs about the same as that amazing SuperMicro ebay deal. Far less space required, a lower electric bill, and a motherboard that is proven to work well with FreeNAS unlike the one suggested in the first post. Unfortunately, it's still multiples more expensive than the solution the OP is seeking.

Realistically, to get decent network performance at a low price point like that, I'd look to a Synology DS1512+ or so. I have seen them used for sale on eBay for like 600 bucks with all 5 drive bays filled with 3TB drives. That gets you 12TB with RAID5 or 9TB with RAID 6. The OS is much easier to learn than FreeNAS and the BTRFS file system that Synology uses will likely detect bit rot just like ZFS in FreeNAS does. Plus, selecting features like "factory reset" actually result in a factory reset, i.e. Synologies re-initialize and re-install the entire OS at that point.

I used to own a DS1512+ and the performance is decent for a low-watt CPU... about 30MB/s transfer. There is a good collection of add-ons to chose from and a similarly helpful forum community. One major difference is that the bug tracker at FreeNAS is answered by humans almost daily while the Synology experience has more of a "throw it over the wall" feel to reporting bugs... eventually, they may get fixed but you get no timetable (just like Sonos with their SMB1/NTLMv1 authentication issue). How FreeNAS answers bugs is a huge positive differentiator vs. the rest of the industry.

That said, these OS's have different purposes, where Synology/QNAP/ReadyNAS have training wheels to help beginners, the combination of FreeNAS and FreeBSD is not as seamless an experience. For example, the average FreeNAS user will likely have to drop down into the CLI/console as part of the setup process. To me, the FreeNAS user experience suggests that the two projects are very independent and tug in different directions at times. Unfortunately, competently administering a FreeNAS is hence a steep learning experience.

 

[Constantin]

Just had a look over at serve the home re: potential reliability of a RAID6 array using consumer-grade disks with 4K sectors in a 5-drive array. The results are pretty encouraging re: reliability and the Synology hardware has worked well for me in the past. A used DS1512+ may not be as fast as my FreeNAS but the price point is also considerably lower.

 

[Chris Moore]

Just had a look over at serve the home re: potential reliability of a RAID6 array using consumer-grade disks with 4K sectors in a 5-drive array. The results are pretty encouraging re: reliability and the Synology hardware has worked well for me in the past. A used DS1512+ may not be as fast as my FreeNAS but the price point is also considerably lower.

You are missing the big picture of ZFS. That reliability calculator is only talking about disk failure taking the array out. The advantage of ZFS is the preservation of data at rest because periodic scrubs of the data, using the checksum values that ZFS stores, are able to correct for bit rot.
If you have files that you want to store long term, like family photos, there is nothing better than ZFS.

 

[Ericloewe]

the BTRFS file system that Synology uses will likely detect bit rot just like ZFS in FreeNAS does.

No. It's far more likely to break completely. When the official wiki has warnings about half the major features, you know it's not anywhere close to being usable.

For example, the average FreeNAS user will likely have to drop down into the CLI/console as part of the setup process.

Only for burn-in, which I don't think is a possibility on your average consumer NAS (without some hacking).

 

[danb35]

a simple Mirror-1

Why do you say "mirror-1"? It's a mirror. Or, if you're talking in RAID terms, a RAID1. If OP sets up a FreeNAS box this way, the output of zpool status will say "mirror-0."

 

[Constantin]

I gave away my synology gear and went with FreeNAS because of ZFS. That said, I wasn’t aware of major issues with btrfs as implemented by Synology. But am happy to be wrong.

As for the setup process / console question, I can can only go by my experience which involved a lot of console work to reset interfaces, setup the LAGG, and so on.

Adding a SLOG required me to learn the BIOS setup process as the SATA SSD I wanted to use for the SLOG took precedence over the SATADOM. etc. My replacement motherboard required a similar process, where I had to disable the chelsio 10gb interfaces as bootable, etc.

I don’t doubt that a skilled IT admin can set up a FreeNAS without ever touching the console or a IPMI shell equivalent but the console is a out-of-band lifesaver every time a simple error makes the FreeNas unreachable.

 

[danb35]

That said, I wasn’t aware of major issues with btrfs as implemented by Synology.

As I understand it, Synology uses btrfs for the filesystem only, and not for the volume manager (I think it just uses LVM for that). That avoids many of the biggest problems with btrfs, but also means you don't get many of its benefits.

 

[KrisBee]

As @danb35 says Synology only uses btrfs as a filesystem on top it's own RAID system (or you can chose standard linux mdadm, if IIRC) combined with device mapper, LVM.

See: https://www.synology.com/en-uk/know...entation_for_Btrfs_File_System_on_SynologyNAS

So multiple software layers to troubleshoot.