Should I be using freeNAS for what I'm looking to do?

[Chris G]

My original purpose was to strictly create a server for NAS that could distribute media to numerous devices.

I've since decided that I have other purposes that I would like to use my NAS. Beacuse of this, I am no longer sure if using freeNAS at the bare metal level is the way to go. Things start to get very complex with all of the different plugins. I'm far from an expert at this stuff, just learning as I go. I'm beginning to think that there are likely other options that would better suit my needs.

My primary use is still to use my server as a NAS. I have 3 3TB HD and a smaller SSD. I'm looking to add functionality for:

- Home surveillance
- Servers for certain gaming applications
- Run some sort of cloud application for remote file sharing

What's the optimal way to set this up? Should I run freeNAS and use a bunch of plugins? Should I start with freeNAS, get a VM on top of freeNAS and then run all these extra things in some form of a linux VM?

I understand that using a type 1 hypervisor like VMWare ESXi and then installing an instance of freeNAS as one VM is highly advised against so it appears that going that route will not be recommended.

Seems like so many options and no idea which makes most sense!

 

[cyberjock]

You should do more research on this forum before even discussing FreeNAS on a VM. It can blow up in your face with a moments notice.

In fact, it's been such a mess that if you read our forum rules, this is one of those topics that you shouldn't even expect to have a discussion about.

 

[Chris G]

You should do more research on this forum before even discussing FreeNAS on a VM. It can blow up in your face with a moments notice.

In fact, it's been such a mess that if you read our forum rules, this is one of those topics that you shouldn't even expect to have a discussion about.

I should have mentioned that my limited research agrees that freeNAS on a VM is far from optimal. The purpose of the thread is ultimately to find what is the most seamless way to incorporate all of these goals into one server.

I will edit my original post to more clearly articulate this.

 

[cyberjock]

The most seamless is to not do what oyu are doing. You don't seem to understand the scope of the problem. If there was a "seamless" way to do it we would have posted it. But there isn't. So its a situation where:

1. You realize that running in a VM is silly and very dangerous and don't do it.
2. You do it on your own and don't get upset if your data is suddenly irrecoverable in the future.

 

[Chris G]

The most seamless is to not do what oyu are doing. You don't seem to understand the scope of the problem. If there was a "seamless" way to do it we would have posted it. But there isn't. So its a situation where:

1. You realize that running in a VM is silly and very dangerous and don't do it.
2. You do it on your own and don't get upset if your data is suddenly irrecoverable in the future.

I'm a bit confused. What am I doing? I haven't done anything yet. I originally had a NAS using unRAID and everything worked very well. I decided there were a few more things I wanted my server to do than become a NAS. That's the point I am at right now. I've yet to do anything and I clearly understand that it makes little sense to go the route of a typer 1 hypervisor.

With that said, what are my other options? Should I just be playing with plugins from withing freeNAS to accomplish things outside the generic scope of your basic NAS?

 

[anodos]

I'm a bit confused. What am I doing? I haven't done anything yet. I originally had a NAS using unRAID and everything worked very well. I decided there were a few more things I wanted my server to do than become a NAS. That's the point I am at right now. I've yet to do anything and I clearly understand that it makes little sense to go the route of a typer 1 hypervisor.

With that said, what are my other options? Should I just be playing with plugins from withing freeNAS to accomplish things outside the generic scope of your basic NAS?

You can probably use jails to achieve what you are thinking about. http://olddoc.freenas.org/index.php/Jails

 

[Chris G]

Interesting. I will look further into this.

 

[mjws00]

At the most basic level. Will plugin's meet your needs? Will you need multiple OS's or would they save you a TON of time and learning curve? Linux jails are going away. The virtualbox plugin's are not. Jails can do almost anything if you know bsd well.

If my server software was linux... and I only had 3 disks. I would likely just run linux mdadm +lvm and be done. Or possibly ZoL. If I need windows, linux and a nas it is trickier. I would bring FreeNAS into the mix for zfs and storage... not because I want a generic/flexible server. There are significant learning curves even with plugin's.

If a type1 hypervisor makes more sense. There are lots of server solutions that can act as a nas and don't have trouble being virtualized. But the plug and play aspects diminish. I do find it a little backwards to use FreeNAS as the 'hypervisor' and run things via virtualbox. But I haven't tested the performance implications as the scenario doesn't suit me. It is a trade off for data reliability in a manner I am unaccustomed to.

Of course your last option is to be evil, risk life, limb, and ex-communication. Cyber loves you... some of us want to watch the world burn. ;)

 

[Chris G]

I need to continue to read and learn when it comes to this stuff.

I'm interested in the option you pose about possibly going with a type 1 hypervisor, but rather than freeNAS, going with a server solution that doesn't have the same issues with being virtualized. What types are there that can possibly accomplish this?

 

[mjws00]

Standard servers we virtualize all the time would be: Windows server, CentOS, RHEL, FreeBSD, (dozens of others). There are other simpiflied distros like smeserver, zentyal, turnkey all of which add their own tweaks. There are some native zfs versions like Illumos, OmniOS, and Openindiana. Napp-It and Nexenta don't seem to have issues with virtualization either. Pretty much anything can serve files via CIFS.

XPEnology has a really polished linux based OS. This is the open source build of synology software. Definitely my second choice as an appliance based NAS, but no zfs.

The gotcha with FreeNAS in a VM is we can't really narrow down why people lose their data. Sometimes the intervals are very long, most failures are poorly documented, there are high instances of user error, and there are always hardware and workload differences. So it is far better to warn harshly and avoid any and all appearance of recommending it as a solution. I'm not a mod. I won't cry over your data. I also think it is great to have guys like cyberjock or jgreco and others in your corner if things go sideways. So it is better for most to color within the lines.

Study and test. Eventually you'll figure out what is the best fit.

 

[Chris G]

Standard servers we virtualize all the time would be: Windows server, CentOS, RHEL, FreeBSD, (dozens of others). There are other simpiflied distros like smeserver, zentyal, turnkey all of which add their own tweaks. There are some native zfs versions like Illumos, OmniOS, and Openindiana. Napp-It and Nexenta don't seem to have issues with virtualization either. Pretty much anything can serve files via CIFS.

XPEnology has a really polished linux based OS. This is the open source build of synology software. Definitely my second choice as an appliance based NAS, but no zfs.

The gotcha with FreeNAS in a VM is we can't really narrow down why people lose their data. Sometimes the intervals are very long, most failures are poorly documented, there are high instances of user error, and there are always hardware and workload differences. So it is far better to warn harshly and avoid any and all appearance of recommending it as a solution. I'm not a mod. I won't cry over your data. I also think it is great to have guys like cyberjock or jgreco and others in your corner if things go sideways. So it is better for most to color within the lines.

Study and test. Eventuall you'll figure out what is the best fit.

Awesome. Thanks for the advice. I'll continue to play around with the hardware that I have and figure out what I find to be the best setup based on my needs and limited knowledge and know how with this stuff.

 

[anodos]

Linux....

What's this Linux thing you keep writing about? Is it like FreeBSD for kids? :)

Seriously though, jails are super-flexible and might meet your needs.

 

[jgreco]

There are some native zfs versions like Illumos, OmniOS, and Openindiana. Napp-It and Nexenta don't seem to have issues with virtualization either. Pretty much anything can serve files via CIFS.

[...]

The gotcha with FreeNAS in a VM is we can't really narrow down why people lose their data. Sometimes the intervals are very long, most failures are poorly documented, there are high instances of user error, and there are always hardware and workload differences.

Actually, in all fairness, every ZFS based system has gotchas and caveats. You can run FreeNAS just fine in a virtual environment with about the same risk profile as Nexenta or whatever. In all cases, loss of nonredundant storage can cause hypervisor virtual disk I/O to wedge, and improper resourcing of the VM for CPU and memory can cause other problems. A hypervisor on a non-ECC platform presents the same class of risks as a FreeNAS on a non-ECC platform to the ZFS pool.

I will note that a hypervisor does add some risk: a workload that tanks the hypervisor is always possible and adds some risk.

I do think it is generally safe to build a FreeNAS VM on top of a proper virtualization environment, but the home labbers, hobbyists, and media enthusiasts who invariably have incredible price sensitivity and reluctance to step up their game are generally trying to build inexpensive, low power, low noise boxes and there's a lot of hardware fail opportunity in there.

That's why my virtualization stickies talk about PCI passthru of the controller... but there are other possible ways to go about it if you're willing to throw appropriate resources at it.

None of the other NAS products above are particularly safer than FreeNAS. We're just more paranoid about letting people know the risks.

 

[Chris G]

I currently use unRAID and may just consider looking an V6 where unRAID can actually be used as a host rather than a guest on top of ESXi. I imagine this will alleviate many of the issues concerning running a NAS on top of a VM.

 

[mjws00]

snip
None of the other NAS products above are particularly safer than FreeNAS. We're just more paranoid about letting people know the risks.

This is a superb point. Not one I was comfortable making.

@anodos LOL. He started it ma... Besides I thought bsd for kids was on my Mac ;)

 

[jgreco]

This is a superb point. Not one I was comfortable making.

It's kind of a mentality thing. I think most of the users here view FreeNAS as an appliance (or server if you prefer), a thing responsible for storing their files, something expected not to fail.

A lot of other projects see their product as being a software "distro", not an "appliance." If something is just software, does the project have any responsibility to ensure that the software is deployed appropriately?

From my own background, I come from the world of medical devices where there was the nightmare of a system failing to boot resulting in bad things happening to a patient. I like to see all the edge cases handled appropriately and I tend to expect failure. The best outcomes rely on quality hardware and well written software.

Cyberjock comes from a slightly different but equally fault-intolerant background. Others here have their own stories and reasons. But we do seem to have collected a fair number of posters here who share some OCD-style "get it right or don't bother doing it" attitude. ;-)

 

[anodos]

A lot of other projects see their product as being a software "distro", not an "appliance." If something is just software, does the project have any responsibility to ensure that the software is deployed appropriately?

From my own background, I come from the world of medical devices where there was the nightmare of a system failing to boot resulting in bad things happening to a patient. I like to see all the edge cases handled appropriately and I tend to expect failure. The best outcomes rely on quality hardware and well written software.

Distros are like cheap Chinese toys you give to your kids with the expectation that they will break them and you'll be replacing them soon enough with more cheap toys. Then again you're not so big on toys are you Mr Grinch?

 

[cyberjock]

Distros are like cheap Chinese toys you give to your kids with the expectation that they will break them and you'll be replacing them soon enough with more cheap toys. Then again you're not so big on toys are you Mr Grinch?

Oh, but his mom is.. ZING!

 

[SirMaster]

If you are trying to do a lot of tasks with your single server I would recommend not using FreeNAS because FreeNAS as a VM host is pretty terrible. It's just not meant for that. Your only option which was added quite recently at that is VirtualBox which leaves a lot to be desired.

There are a lot better options.

One of the best is SmartOS which is based on Illumos. You run ZFS natively on there of course and then utilize KVM (which is a very powerful and fully-featured hypervisor) to run your various VMs for all your other servers and services.

On SmartOS everything comes pre-installed already and set up specifically for this task. There is even a WebGUI you can install it you want a nicer time managing it.
http://wiki.smartos.org/display/DOC/SmartOS+GUI+Remote+Management

Personally I run a Linux server with ZFS on Linux natively and then use KVM (with Proxmox GUI) and LXC for my virtual machines and linux containers to allow me to run all my other services and software on my single server.

You could go with a plain FreeBSD server as well which also has KVM support these days.

 

[anodos]

If you are trying to do a lot of tasks with your single server I would recommend not using FreeNAS because FreeNAS as a VM host is pretty terrible. It's just not meant for that. Your only option which was added quite recently at that is VirtualBox which leaves a lot to be desired.

That's assuming the OP's requirements can't run in a jail.