Will it FreeNAS - very old hardware

[rfielder]

I now have my FreeNAS server working. It has about 40Tb of free space, from eight 8Tb drives. The box has been up for almost two weeks, and has been reliable and useful so far, although I still consider this to be the test phase.

It is now time to start planning how the old Windows Home Server (WHS) box will be used. I would like to run it as another FreeNAS server, with about 10TB free space. That would be enough for it to work with our most-used data. The goal would be to then have this server backed up to the big FreeNAS server, giving us two copies of all our critical files.

Just for fun, I replaced the boot drive in the WHS box with a 2.5" SSD that had been the boot drive in the FreeNAS system during testing. The FreeNAS system final configuration uses an M.2 NVMe drive to boot, leaving all eight SATA ports free for data drives.

The WHS box booted into FreeNAS, saw all the drives attached, and was ready to create a pool using RAIDZ2. Given the age of the hardware, this was quite surprising.

My question to those here with more experience than I have is - is this a good idea?

Hardware configuration of the WHS server:
ASUS P5P800 motherboard
P4 CPU 3.8Ghz, 4 cores, 8 threads
4GB RAM installed - this is the max the motherboard supports
Marvell 88E801 Gigabit LAN controller
Eight SATA drives attached in total, including the boot drive.
IDE optical drive
Two PCI SATA controllers attached, each with 4 SATA ports. I can't see the brand, but they were cheapies at the time.
AGP Video card

This box was build over 10 years ago, and has been running WHS since without issue. Were it not for some of the limitations of WHS, I would have kept the box running for a while longer.

FreeNAS booted on this hardware, saw everything, showed no issues, and was ready to use all installed hard drives to create a pool. I had no trouble linking to the box from another PC, so the network controller was recognized.

The only issue I encountered was an inability to get the system to boot from a USB drive. That is why I went with an existing FreeNAS install. It was my intent to start with a fresh install on the SSD. Looks like I will have to burn FreeNAS to a CD/DVD to be able to install with this hardware.

I am a bit concerned about running FreeNAS with only 4Gb RAM. That alone may force me to do what I originally expected to be needed - new motherboard, CPU, RAM, and CPU cooler.

What is the consensus here? Would it be safe to run with this hardware? Or should it be expected that this hardware will prove unreliable?

Thanks in advance!

 

[PhiloEpisteme]

The FreeNAS system final configuration uses an M.2 NVMe drive to boot, leaving all eight SATA ports free for data drives.

I see this configuration a lot; and while it will work; it isn't exactly the most efficient in all cases. My argument is that the M.2 slot is extremely fast; and you don't need that for your boot drive. But, if you have a heavy sync work load, you may want that speed and slot for a SLOG device. You can typically get more SATA ports easily with an HBA; provided you have the PCIe slots available. Just something to consider.

4GB RAM installed - this is the max the motherboard supports

I would guess this is going to be come an issue in the future. Even if the system is stable with this little bit of memory, which I wouldn't expect long-term, the other issue is the ARC. The ARC lives in ram and when you have so little split between the ARC and your system's OS requirements this will put a damper on performance. Your system will spend more time hitting those spinning disks on reads rather than hitting the ARC. This is a best case scenario, I would guess.

IDE optical drive

Curios what you're using this for? Just to install the OS perhaps?

Two PCI SATA controllers attached, each with 4 SATA ports. I can't see the brand, but they were cheapies at the time.

I don't have a lot of experience with these; but I have seen folks report issues with some SATA controllers. If you plan to use it I would figure out the brand/model and make sure it has support in FreeBSD. Also, make sure it is isn't doing any sort of RAID and ensure it is just doing "passthrough" to give the OS complete and unaltered access to the disks. Generally folks opt for SAS HBAs rather than SATA controllers. The HBAs are known to work well with FreeNAS and can be used with SATA drives.

I am a bit concerned about running FreeNAS with only 4Gb RAM. That alone may force me to do what I originally expected to be needed - new motherboard, CPU, RAM, and CPU cooler.

What is the consensus here? Would it be safe to run with this hardware? Or should it be expected that this hardware will prove unreliable?

I would guess it will be unreliable owing to the ram alone. I'm a bit worried about the NIC and controller as well but don't have direct experience with them; maybe someone who does will chime in or you can search the web for more info. If I were you I'd pick up a used X9 or X10 supermicro board, used CPU, and a new kit of ram (largest module supported by board) and call it a day.

What are the full uses you want to get out of this machine? That will help inform what type of hardware you should be looking at.

 

[rfielder]

I see this configuration a lot; and while it will work; it isn't exactly the most efficient in all cases. My argument is that the M.2 slot is extremely fast; and you don't need that for your boot drive.

The speed is not needed. What it provides is the ability to use all eight SATA ports on the motherboard for data disks.

II would guess this is going to be come an issue in the future. Even if the system is stable with this little bit of memory, which I wouldn't expect long-term, the other issue is the ARC.

That is what I suspected.

ICurios what you're using this for? Just to install the OS perhaps?

Remember, this system is over 10 years old. The IDE optical drive was used to install the previous OS.

II don't have a lot of experience with these; but I have seen folks report issues with some SATA controllers. If you plan to use it I would figure out the brand/model and make sure it has support in FreeBSD.

I was assuming that if FreeNAS saw the drives and was able to build a pool, then it was seeing the drive controllers.

Which does not speak to reliability, or the ability to handle heavy workloads, of course.

II would guess it will be unreliable owing to the ram alone. I'm a bit worried about the NIC and controller as well but don't have direct experience with them; maybe someone who does will chime in or you can search the web for more info. If I were you I'd pick up a used X9 or X10 supermicro board, used CPU, and a new kit of ram (largest module supported by board) and call it a day.

If I replace the motherboard, I will go new. Per the bottom of my message, my first FreeNAS server was built with a Xeon and a Supermicro motherboard.

Much as I would really like to save money, I value long term reliability far more.

Plus, as much as possible I prefer the latest generation of motherboard and CPU, which can give the system a much longer lifetime without slowing to a crawl. When I built the WHS server I followed this approach, and over 10 years later the system will performs well within the limitations of WHS.

IWhat are the full uses you want to get out of this machine? That will help inform what type of hardware you should be looking at.

Sorry, I thought I had described how this server would be used.

MiniNAS, as it will be named, will hold all of our data that changes. I will be treating it somewhat like a transaction processor.

We will do our work on this server each day. At night, the contents of MiniNAS will be backed up to the main server, FreeNAS. That not only gives us two servers with RAIDZ2, it gives us two copies of all our critical files.

Please note that "work" does not mean commercial work. I am about to be retired, and my wife uses it for her line dance class plans and history, and her recipies. Not "critical" in the sense that a business uses the term, but important to us. :)

The main server holds all of our TV shows and movies as well as all our data. That will take up about half of the 40Tb free - I am a bit of a packrat when it comes to this stuff. The data for MiniNAS will take up about 6 - 8 TB, and is fairly static in terms of total size.

Of course, all this depends on figuring out how to get one FreeNAS server to back itself up to another FreeNAS server. No doubt I will be back asking for assistance on this before too long......

 

[HoneyBadger]

Much as I would really like to save money, I value long term reliability far more.

This really does summarize the answer here. Would it work? Possibly; it's below the recommended minimum RAM, and has some other components that by your own admission might be cheap or less-than-optimal. Will it be reliable long-term? It's already considered "off target" now, so I'd have to say it won't be a viable long-term solution.

Taking a carbon-copy of your existing in-progress build (although I don't necessarily agree with the need to buy brand new every time) and adjusting for a smaller install SSD and fewer disks would definitely align itself a lot more closely with the desire for long-term reliability.

 

[PhiloEpisteme]

The speed is not needed. What it provides is the ability to use all eight SATA ports on the motherboard for data disks.

Yup, I understand. I just wanted to point out that if you ever thought you'd need a SLOG and wanted the M.2 form factor you could get a cheap HBA to add more SATA ports rather than using the M.2 to boot. Whether that makes sense for you depends on your situation, of course.

Taking a carbon-copy of your existing in-progress build (although I don't necessarily agree with the need to buy brand new every time) and adjusting for a smaller install SSD and fewer disks would definitely align itself a lot more closely with the desire for long-term reliability.

Very much agree with this. I also second the opinion that used isn't always a bad thing and isn't necessarily always aligned against reliability and performance.

Hopefully this feedback has helped shape your expectations for that machine. :)

 

[rfielder]

I also second the opinion that used isn't always a bad thing and isn't necessarily always aligned against reliability and performance.

Used in my neck of the woods is not an option for me at this time.

Partly because I have very restricted mobility. It will be a while before I can drive again, likely long after I would like to have this machine in use.

And partly because I am not sure about buying used online, without the ability to inspect the product before paying.

 

[PhiloEpisteme]

And partly because I am not sure about buying used online, without the ability to inspect the product before paying.

Yeah, I get that. I was similarly apprehensive with my first used build. I bought from good sellers on ebay and hoped for the best; it worked out really well in my case. Of course availability depends a lot on where you live.