Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
maybe this is not a correct place, but you can try with opensolaris+zfs. with zfs, you can create iscsi, nfs and smb shares from cli. it's really easy to do. -- -- Original Message --- From: Rudi Ahlers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: CentOS mailing list Sent: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 09:08:15 +0200 Subject: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible? > Hi all > > I want to look at setting up a simple / cheap SAN / NAS server using > normal PIV motherboard, 2GB (or even more) RAM, Core 2 Duo CPU (probably > a Intel 6700 / 6750 / 6800) & some SATA HDD's (4 or 6x 320GB - 750GB). > My budget is limited, so I can't afford a pre-built NAS device. > > Can this be done with CentOS? I've been looking FreeNAS (which is built > on FreeBSD), and it look like a great project, but since the hardware > support in FreeBSD is limit, I'd rather use Linux for it. > > Has anyone done this? If so, please share a bit in your experiences :) > > -- > > Kind Regards > Rudi Ahlers > CEO, SoftDux > > Web: http://www.SoftDux.com > Check out my technical blog, http://blog.softdux.com for Linux or other technical stuff, or visit http://www.WebHostingTalk.co.za for Web Hosting stuff > > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos --- End of Original Message --- ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Rudi Ahlers wrote: > > >Using CentOS is preferred since I know it the best. I haven't used >FreeBSD since v4.7 ( I think I had a look @ 4.9 & 5.4 as well), and I >don't know Solaris. >I think my action plan now will be to figure out how to install CentOS >on a USB memory stick and make it boot on any machine (making it easy to >replace if need be), and then to play around with the RAID a bit and see >how well it works. In your problem above, you can use unetbootin (google it) and you can make bootable USB with Linux (Fedora, CentOS, Ubuntu, etc.) inside. There is available both for windows and linux platform. I hope this helps. junji aisalen.wordpress.com Linux Registered User #253162 CentOS User Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Joseph L. Casale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Also, conder trimming your posts please > > > >What does that mean, I'm not a native speaker so I didn't follow that, > sorry. > >Didn't want to ofend or even make mistakes, my only point its that freenas > could do the job under a SMB enviroment. > >And I don't even compare CentOS between FreeNAS in anything. > > Victor, > What KB meant to say was "Consider trimming your posts". > What that means is to cut away the non relevant text and only include in an > indented manner what it is you are replying to. It helps to keep the post > small, easy to follow and neat. > > No harm done/meant... > > jlc > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > thank you Joseph my mistake. cheers. -- "It is human nature to think wisely and act in an absurd fashion." "Todo el desorden del mundo proviene de las profesiones mal o mediocremente servidas" ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
>>Also, conder trimming your posts please > >What does that mean, I'm not a native speaker so I didn't follow that, sorry. >Didn't want to ofend or even make mistakes, my only point its that freenas >could do the job under a SMB enviroment. >And I don't even compare CentOS between FreeNAS in anything. Victor, What KB meant to say was "Consider trimming your posts". What that means is to cut away the non relevant text and only include in an indented manner what it is you are replying to. It helps to keep the post small, easy to follow and neat. No harm done/meant... jlc ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Victor Padro wrote: > > isnt freenas also unionfs ? > > > > Yes it is. > > I would therefore pass on freenas, purely on that one point. > > My HDs are not using UFS they're on Ext2 > Also, conder trimming your posts please > What does that mean, I'm not a native speaker so I didn't follow that, sorry. Didn't want to ofend or even make mistakes, my only point its that freenas could do the job under a SMB enviroment. And I don't even compare CentOS between FreeNAS in anything. > -- > Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > -- "It is human nature to think wisely and act in an absurd fashion." "Todo el desorden del mundo proviene de las profesiones mal o mediocremente servidas" ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Victor Padro wrote: > isnt freenas also unionfs ? > > Yes it is. I would therefore pass on freenas, purely on that one point. Also, conder trimming your posts please -- Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
"It is human nature to think wisely and act in an absurd fashion." "Todo el desorden del mundo proviene de las profesiones mal o mediocremente servidas" On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 4:10 PM, Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Victor Padro wrote: > >> I've been reading this thread since it started, and what I could really >> say is you should go for freenas, >> > > isnt freenas also unionfs ? > Yes it is. > > -- > Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Victor Padro wrote: I've been reading this thread since it started, and what I could really say is you should go for freenas, isnt freenas also unionfs ? -- Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 8:50 AM, Rudi Ahlers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > nate wrote: > >> Rudi Ahlers wrote: >> >> >> >>> I think my action plan now will be to figure out how to install CentOS >>> on a USB memory stick and make it boot on any machine (making it easy to >>> replace if need be), and then to play around with the RAID a bit and see >>> how well it works. >>> >>> >> >> Another option you may want to consider is a PATA->CF adapter. I use >> these for my OpenBSD firewalls and have them installed on 1GB CF cards. >> Performance should be better? Compatibility certainly is better, there's >> no way I could boot to USB off these aging P3-800 systems. The CF cards >> just show up as regular HDs >> >> I use these ($7): >> http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=SY-ADIDE2CF-B1&cpc=SCH >> >> Paired with Lexar CF cards. Not all CF is created equal, well maybe it is >> today. I found my Lexar CF cards were 5-10x faster than my Kingston cards >> of the same size, which surprised me. Not that I need high performance in >> firewalls that do no disk I/O but it was painful for the OS install to >> take hours(Kingston) instead of minutes(Lexar). Both pairs of CF cards >> are a few years old, today maybe everything out there is reasonably >> fast. >> >> At least with the above adapters be aware that those adapters above >> do stick up. I think a 2U chassis can fit them(I have tons of experience >> in supermicro systems). But no guarantees. You may need another adapter >> or perhaps a male to female IDE cable so that you can mount it another >> way in the chassis. >> >> I suppose you could even get two and run RAID. >> >> Just don't put your swap on the flash if you can avoid it. >> >> nate >> >> >> __ >> > Thanx, nate > > That's a good suggestion, but I think the USB memory sticks could work > better / more reliable, and will be easier to access in the cabinet. I'll > play around with it a bit and see how it works. > > -- > > Kind Regards > Rudi Ahlers > CEO, SoftDux > > Web: http://www.SoftDux.com > Check out my technical blog, http://blog.softdux.com for Linux or other > technical stuff, or visit http://www.WebHostingTalk.co.za for Web Hosting > stuff > > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > Hi, (I apologize in advance if someone thinks this is OT) I've been reading this thread since it started, and what I could really say is you should go for freenas, it can be installed in a matter of minutes in a usb pendrive, I use it on a 2gb kingston one using an IBM eServer tower chassis, Intel D201GLY2 mainboard, 1Gb 667Mhz RAM, 2 HDs those are 750gb SATA in RAID5 which are hold entirely for backing up my servers, that include M$ SQL, M$ Exchange, CentOS LAMPs and CentOS MySQL boxes(about 500Mb daily using Samba and NFS)this box has been running about eight months now, also I have another one running on an old Dell P3 using a cheap VIA SATA PCI card and a CF to IDE adapter which holds 320Gb and 500Gb SATA HDs for my personal backup and haven't had any issue except for my electrical bill that increased a few mexican pesos only. The best thing it's you configure all via web, and there's no need to learn FreeBSD at all. You should read the Knowledge base maybe it can help you more to make your mind: http://www.freenaskb.info/kb/ hope it helps, cu when i cu. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
nate wrote: Rudi Ahlers wrote: I think my action plan now will be to figure out how to install CentOS on a USB memory stick and make it boot on any machine (making it easy to replace if need be), and then to play around with the RAID a bit and see how well it works. Another option you may want to consider is a PATA->CF adapter. I use these for my OpenBSD firewalls and have them installed on 1GB CF cards. Performance should be better? Compatibility certainly is better, there's no way I could boot to USB off these aging P3-800 systems. The CF cards just show up as regular HDs I use these ($7): http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=SY-ADIDE2CF-B1&cpc=SCH Paired with Lexar CF cards. Not all CF is created equal, well maybe it is today. I found my Lexar CF cards were 5-10x faster than my Kingston cards of the same size, which surprised me. Not that I need high performance in firewalls that do no disk I/O but it was painful for the OS install to take hours(Kingston) instead of minutes(Lexar). Both pairs of CF cards are a few years old, today maybe everything out there is reasonably fast. At least with the above adapters be aware that those adapters above do stick up. I think a 2U chassis can fit them(I have tons of experience in supermicro systems). But no guarantees. You may need another adapter or perhaps a male to female IDE cable so that you can mount it another way in the chassis. I suppose you could even get two and run RAID. Just don't put your swap on the flash if you can avoid it. nate __ Thanx, nate That's a good suggestion, but I think the USB memory sticks could work better / more reliable, and will be easier to access in the cabinet. I'll play around with it a bit and see how it works. -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers CEO, SoftDux Web: http://www.SoftDux.com Check out my technical blog, http://blog.softdux.com for Linux or other technical stuff, or visit http://www.WebHostingTalk.co.za for Web Hosting stuff ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Rudi Ahlers wrote: > I think my action plan now will be to figure out how to install CentOS > on a USB memory stick and make it boot on any machine (making it easy to > replace if need be), and then to play around with the RAID a bit and see > how well it works. Another option you may want to consider is a PATA->CF adapter. I use these for my OpenBSD firewalls and have them installed on 1GB CF cards. Performance should be better? Compatibility certainly is better, there's no way I could boot to USB off these aging P3-800 systems. The CF cards just show up as regular HDs I use these ($7): http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=SY-ADIDE2CF-B1&cpc=SCH Paired with Lexar CF cards. Not all CF is created equal, well maybe it is today. I found my Lexar CF cards were 5-10x faster than my Kingston cards of the same size, which surprised me. Not that I need high performance in firewalls that do no disk I/O but it was painful for the OS install to take hours(Kingston) instead of minutes(Lexar). Both pairs of CF cards are a few years old, today maybe everything out there is reasonably fast. At least with the above adapters be aware that those adapters above do stick up. I think a 2U chassis can fit them(I have tons of experience in supermicro systems). But no guarantees. You may need another adapter or perhaps a male to female IDE cable so that you can mount it another way in the chassis. I suppose you could even get two and run RAID. Just don't put your swap on the flash if you can avoid it. nate ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Sorin Srbu wrote: > The guy who initially asked, IIRC, wanted some 3-4TB storage. This can be > accomplished easily with a regular mid/maxi-size tower and a handful of > 1TB-SATA drives. Even the midsize oldish Compucase-case I have at home can > fit > four 3,5"-drives in the hd-cage and another four in the 5,25"-bays. Suppose > you fill that case with 1TB-drives and you have 8TB available. My argument > is > that there is no explicit need for the hardware you mention, despite how > sexy > it sounds. 8-) Unfortunately it's common for most people that don't have experience with storage to confuse raw storage space with I/O performance(IOPS). It's not uncommon for someone to need say 4TB of space but need 50 or even 75 disks to use for that space because they need the IOPS. In my experience the average I/O size seems to be sub 20kB, which means a 10k RPM disk can only sustain about 1.9MBytes/second (15kB I/O size), before latency starts becoming a serious issue. Of course if you have specialized applications you can probably push the I/O size much higher, I'm talking for just generic off the shelf type tasks, such as file serving, Oracle/MySQL databases, etc. I came in late to the conversation I did see the original posts around wanting a cheap system and saw several good answers, I myself have used Openfiler and it's pretty good(for iSCSI, it seems flakey for NAS). Those types of systems really cannot be upgraded online safely. The poster I responded to asked about how do you upgrade, so I responded. The obvious answer for a "cheap" system is to upgrade the live box and reboot. There aren't many ways to upgrade such a system. Maybe if you have a cheap fiberchannel storage array(ala Infortrend) you can have two NAS front ends connected to the same back end storage, minimizing downtime and risk you can upgrade on system and flip people over to it, if it screws up you can flip back fairly quickly(though still not an online operation). I recall a kernel update to Openfiler that caused random kernel panics. Fortunately I was able to go back to the earlier kernel. (this was running their "stable" distribution) nate ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Rudi Ahlers wrote: > You're quite right with what you say. I have a 2U chassis already, with a Gigabyte motherboard + 2GB RAM + Core 2 Duo E7650. I also have a few 160GB SATA HDD's laying around, but they're too small. So, I'll be option to put 6 (if I can get the HDD cages fitted into the chassis) 1TB HDD's into it instead, which with RAID 10 will give me 3TB space. Thus, I don't want to spend more money to buy new equipment if I have this already. Using CentOS is preferred since I know it the best. I haven't used FreeBSD since v4.7 ( I think I had a look @ 4.9 & 5.4 as well), and I don't know Solaris. I think my action plan now will be to figure out how to install CentOS on a USB memory stick and make it boot on any machine (making it easy to replace if need be), and then to play around with the RAID a bit and see how well it works. Or you could just install on small /boot (separate) and / (can be in LVM) partitions on the HD's this time around and work out the details of the USB boot when Centos 6 is available. Maybe there will be cheap 32Gb devices by then. -- Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Rudi Ahlers wrote: You're quite right with what you say. I have a 2U chassis already, with a Gigabyte motherboard + 2GB RAM + Core 2 Duo E7650. I also have a few 160GB SATA HDD's laying around, but they're too small. So, I'll be option to put 6 (if I can get the HDD cages fitted into the chassis) 1TB HDD's into it instead, which with RAID 10 will give me 3TB space. Thus, I don't want to spend more money to buy new equipment if I have this already. Using CentOS is preferred since I know it the best. I haven't used This thread is quite interesting, I think quite a lot of people who contributed to it dont seem to realise you can do everything using just the stock CentOS distro, and if you are using CentOS-5, the scsi-target tools will let you setup and manage iscsi targets as well. Setup lvm on the raw drives, and get snapshot and lvm mirror support as well. -- Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Sorin Srbu wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Les Mikesell Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 3:32 AM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible? Sorin Srbu wrote: Rudi Ahlers wrote: Grow data online, convert between RAID levels online, migrate data between spindle types(FC<->SATA) online etc. Create a volume, and you never have to worry about answering the question 'is it really optimal?' because you can change it at any time without application impact or downtime. Sounds awfully expensive. True? Most of them are, but you can add whole shelves of disks. I'm not sure it matters so much in a case that holds six drives that you fill from the start and then have nowhere to grow anyway. The guy who initially asked, IIRC, wanted some 3-4TB storage. This can be accomplished easily with a regular mid/maxi-size tower and a handful of 1TB-SATA drives. Even the midsize oldish Compucase-case I have at home can fit four 3,5"-drives in the hd-cage and another four in the 5,25"-bays. Suppose you fill that case with 1TB-drives and you have 8TB available. My argument is that there is no explicit need for the hardware you mention, despite how sexy it sounds. 8-) My understanding was that he wanted some kind mid-level kind of storage solution based on hw he already had and not sink the entire budget on a roomful of EMC etc hardware. OTOH, this discussion has been a bit sidetracked since the beginning. 8-) ___ Hi Sorin, You're quite right with what you say. I have a 2U chassis already, with a Gigabyte motherboard + 2GB RAM + Core 2 Duo E7650. I also have a few 160GB SATA HDD's laying around, but they're too small. So, I'll be option to put 6 (if I can get the HDD cages fitted into the chassis) 1TB HDD's into it instead, which with RAID 10 will give me 3TB space. Thus, I don't want to spend more money to buy new equipment if I have this already. Using CentOS is preferred since I know it the best. I haven't used FreeBSD since v4.7 ( I think I had a look @ 4.9 & 5.4 as well), and I don't know Solaris. I think my action plan now will be to figure out how to install CentOS on a USB memory stick and make it boot on any machine (making it easy to replace if need be), and then to play around with the RAID a bit and see how well it works. -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers CEO, SoftDux Web: http://www.SoftDux.com Check out my technical blog, http://blog.softdux.com for Linux or other technical stuff, or visit http://www.WebHostingTalk.co.za for Web Hosting stuff ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
>-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of >Les Mikesell >Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 3:32 AM >To: CentOS mailing list >Subject: Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible? > >Sorin Srbu wrote: >> >>> >>> Rudi Ahlers wrote: >>> >>> Grow data online, convert between RAID levels online, migrate data >>> between spindle types(FC<->SATA) online etc. Create a volume, and >>> you never have to worry about answering the question 'is it really >>> optimal?' because you can change it at any time without application >>> impact or downtime. >> >> Sounds awfully expensive. True? > >Most of them are, but you can add whole shelves of disks. I'm not sure >it matters so much in a case that holds six drives that you fill from >the start and then have nowhere to grow anyway. The guy who initially asked, IIRC, wanted some 3-4TB storage. This can be accomplished easily with a regular mid/maxi-size tower and a handful of 1TB-SATA drives. Even the midsize oldish Compucase-case I have at home can fit four 3,5"-drives in the hd-cage and another four in the 5,25"-bays. Suppose you fill that case with 1TB-drives and you have 8TB available. My argument is that there is no explicit need for the hardware you mention, despite how sexy it sounds. 8-) My understanding was that he wanted some kind mid-level kind of storage solution based on hw he already had and not sink the entire budget on a roomful of EMC etc hardware. OTOH, this discussion has been a bit sidetracked since the beginning. 8-) smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Les Mikesell schrieb: Sorin Srbu wrote: Rudi Ahlers wrote: Grow data online, convert between RAID levels online, migrate data between spindle types(FC<->SATA) online etc. Create a volume, and you never have to worry about answering the question 'is it really optimal?' because you can change it at any time without application impact or downtime. Sounds awfully expensive. True? Most of them are, but you can add whole shelves of disks. I'm not sure it matters so much in a case that holds six drives that you fill from the start and then have nowhere to grow anyway. Hey, Guys, I read through this several times. I have several Home-Cheap NAS at home (Naslite from www.serverelements.com, Freenas from www.freenas.org and testing Openfiler & Co.). What you mentioned here is all more or less for bigger Server-Farms and goes in the SAN direction.You can also set up what here is mentioned with DataCore & Co, ok. But I think we came to the conclusion that there are only few products wich fits to "cheap NAS selfmade". There are many ways to set this up with CentOS or any other Linux Distro, but you always have to install & confugure stuff. Naslite and FreeNas are small Distros for ONLY that - NAS out of the box with (older) Hardware. Also there are some SoHo NAS with more Feature like Thecus but then it goes up to the pro series. I did'nt saw yet a selfmade CentOS Live CD thingy that works out of the box as NAS. Maybe when SolidStateDisks are up to 10Cents/MB the time is right for those... sincerly Henrik ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Sorin Srbu wrote: Rudi Ahlers wrote: Grow data online, convert between RAID levels online, migrate data between spindle types(FC<->SATA) online etc. Create a volume, and you never have to worry about answering the question 'is it really optimal?' because you can change it at any time without application impact or downtime. Sounds awfully expensive. True? Most of them are, but you can add whole shelves of disks. I'm not sure it matters so much in a case that holds six drives that you fill from the start and then have nowhere to grow anyway. -- Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
John R Pierce wrote: ok, so in your setup the OS is totally separate from the data itself? indeed, almost all my servers are setup this way, too. A pair of smaller disks, 36GB or 80GB are mirrored for the OS and software, then populate the rest with large disks in raid10 or raid5 for whatever task this server is intended for (database or bulk storage, or whatever). This strategy is probably most useful when you have several machines that are similar enough to swap drives and keep a spare chassis around that you can use as a backup and to build/test your next major update. I generally use smaller disks for the 1st pair, but if there is extra space you can use it for something that changes slowly enough that you would be able to rsync it over to the replacement before the swap. The main thing is to not include the OS drives in LVM or RAID0 with the others that you don't expect to swap. -- Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
>-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of >nate >Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 7:12 AM >To: centos@centos.org >Subject: Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible? > >Rudi Ahlers wrote: > >Grow data online, convert between RAID levels online, migrate data >between spindle types(FC<->SATA) online etc. Create a volume, and >you never have to worry about answering the question 'is it really >optimal?' because you can change it at any time without application >impact or downtime. Sounds awfully expensive. True? smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Rudi Ahlers wrote: ok, so in your setup the OS is totally separate from the data itself? indeed, almost all my servers are setup this way, too. A pair of smaller disks, 36GB or 80GB are mirrored for the OS and software, then populate the rest with large disks in raid10 or raid5 for whatever task this server is intended for (database or bulk storage, or whatever). ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Les Mikesell wrote: Rudi Ahlers wrote: David Mackintosh wrote: On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 02:08:33PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote: Have you updated to Centos 5.2 yet? And if so, did it improve NFS performance? Sorry, these computers are in production now so I can't fiddle with them. Besides, this would be a "long" upgrade -- they are both CentOS 4.x systems. ___ This raises an interesting question. What do you do in this kind of scenario? How do you upgrade a NAS / SAN with say 5 / 10 TB worth of data? I haven't done anything that big, but I normally put the OS on a small mirrored pair of swappable drives so an upgrade consists of swapping those drives with a new set pre-installed in a spare chassis. That way you are only down for the time it takes to reboot and if anything goes wrong you can put the old set back. In any case you wouldn't be doing anything to the data partitions in an upgrade. ok, so in your setup the OS is totally separate from the data itself? So, I guess I need to rethink my setup. Since I have a 2U chassis, which can only take 6 drives, I guess I should maybe look into running the OS from a USB memory stick or something. -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers CEO, SoftDux Web: http://www.SoftDux.com Check out my technical blog, http://blog.softdux.com for Linux or other technical stuff, or visit http://www.WebHostingTalk.co.za for Web Hosting stuff ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Rudi Ahlers wrote: David Mackintosh wrote: On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 02:08:33PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote: Have you updated to Centos 5.2 yet? And if so, did it improve NFS performance? Sorry, these computers are in production now so I can't fiddle with them. Besides, this would be a "long" upgrade -- they are both CentOS 4.x systems. ___ This raises an interesting question. What do you do in this kind of scenario? How do you upgrade a NAS / SAN with say 5 / 10 TB worth of data? I haven't done anything that big, but I normally put the OS on a small mirrored pair of swappable drives so an upgrade consists of swapping those drives with a new set pre-installed in a spare chassis. That way you are only down for the time it takes to reboot and if anything goes wrong you can put the old set back. In any case you wouldn't be doing anything to the data partitions in an upgrade. -- Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
nate wrote: Rudi Ahlers wrote: nate wrote: Rudi Ahlers wrote: This raises an interesting question. What do you do in this kind of scenario? How do you upgrade a NAS / SAN with say 5 / 10 TB worth of data? Nate, what EXACTLY does that have todo with the topic? We're talking about a self-build NAS / SAN running on Linux (and UNIX), NOT a commercial product Everything I believe. Everything is a commercial product unless your building the circuit boards from scratch. Your specific question was how do you upgrade a NAS / SAN with say 5 / 10TB worth of data? My answer is you build one that can be upgraded online. And the array I mentioned previously runs on Debian. The largest EMC arrays run on Linux as well. While EMC won't let you self-build their high end systems, there are other companies that sell SAN/NAS gear that runs on Linux that will let you "self build". nate ___ No, it's not quite the same thing. A commercial storage device is built in a such a way that the OS (normally on a separate HDD / PROM / flash disk / etc) can be upgraded with the suppliers pre-built patches. We're talking about doing this totally from scratch. i.e, how to build one from PC components you have / purchased from a supplier yourself. This also involves setting up the software (in this case CentOS, but FreeBSD & Solaris was recommended as well). If I wanted a commercial product, then I would have contacted the vendors and asked them this question. And if you've been following the thread, you'll see that we discussed Intel & AMD, SATA, SAS & SCSI, software & hardware RAID, etc, not which commercial device works better and which don't. It's nice to know what commercial vendors offer a way to upgrade the OS, but I'm not interested in a commercial pre-built product, I don't have that kind of capital -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers CEO, SoftDux Web: http://www.SoftDux.com Check out my technical blog, http://blog.softdux.com for Linux or other technical stuff, or visit http://www.WebHostingTalk.co.za for Web Hosting stuff ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Rudi Ahlers wrote: > nate wrote: >> Rudi Ahlers wrote: >> >> >>> This raises an interesting question. What do you do in this kind of >>> scenario? How do you upgrade a NAS / SAN with say 5 / 10 TB worth of >>> data? > Nate, what EXACTLY does that have todo with the topic? We're talking > about a self-build NAS / SAN running on Linux (and UNIX), NOT a > commercial product Everything I believe. Everything is a commercial product unless your building the circuit boards from scratch. Your specific question was how do you upgrade a NAS / SAN with say 5 / 10TB worth of data? My answer is you build one that can be upgraded online. And the array I mentioned previously runs on Debian. The largest EMC arrays run on Linux as well. While EMC won't let you self-build their high end systems, there are other companies that sell SAN/NAS gear that runs on Linux that will let you "self build". nate ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
nate wrote: Rudi Ahlers wrote: This raises an interesting question. What do you do in this kind of scenario? How do you upgrade a NAS / SAN with say 5 / 10 TB worth of data? Lots of the more modern enterprise arrays support online upgrades. Some of them even support re-distributing data across the new spindles to maximize performance/limit hot spots. I personally wouldn't want to purchase any storage array that will have important data on it that doesn't have these abilities. My favorite storage company - 3par has some of the more advanced online optimizations, sample - http://www.3par.com/documents/3PAR-do-ds-08.0.pdf Grow data online, convert between RAID levels online, migrate data between spindle types(FC<->SATA) online etc. Create a volume, and you never have to worry about answering the question 'is it really optimal?' because you can change it at any time without application impact or downtime. nate ___ Nate, what EXACTLY does that have todo with the topic? We're talking about a self-build NAS / SAN running on Linux (and UNIX), NOT a commercial product -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers CEO, SoftDux Web: http://www.SoftDux.com Check out my technical blog, http://blog.softdux.com for Linux or other technical stuff, or visit http://www.WebHostingTalk.co.za for Web Hosting stuff ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Rudi Ahlers wrote: > This raises an interesting question. What do you do in this kind of > scenario? How do you upgrade a NAS / SAN with say 5 / 10 TB worth of data? Lots of the more modern enterprise arrays support online upgrades. Some of them even support re-distributing data across the new spindles to maximize performance/limit hot spots. I personally wouldn't want to purchase any storage array that will have important data on it that doesn't have these abilities. My favorite storage company - 3par has some of the more advanced online optimizations, sample - http://www.3par.com/documents/3PAR-do-ds-08.0.pdf Grow data online, convert between RAID levels online, migrate data between spindle types(FC<->SATA) online etc. Create a volume, and you never have to worry about answering the question 'is it really optimal?' because you can change it at any time without application impact or downtime. nate ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
David Mackintosh wrote: On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 02:08:33PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote: Have you updated to Centos 5.2 yet? And if so, did it improve NFS performance? Sorry, these computers are in production now so I can't fiddle with them. Besides, this would be a "long" upgrade -- they are both CentOS 4.x systems. ___ This raises an interesting question. What do you do in this kind of scenario? How do you upgrade a NAS / SAN with say 5 / 10 TB worth of data? -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers CEO, SoftDux Web: http://www.SoftDux.com Check out my technical blog, http://blog.softdux.com for Linux or other technical stuff, or visit http://www.WebHostingTalk.co.za for Web Hosting stuff ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 02:08:33PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote: > Have you updated to Centos 5.2 yet? And if so, did it improve NFS > performance? Sorry, these computers are in production now so I can't fiddle with them. Besides, this would be a "long" upgrade -- they are both CentOS 4.x systems. -- /\oo/\ / /()\ \ David Mackintosh | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.xdroop.com pgpByjAutaftd.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
David Mackintosh wrote: Despite a lot of fidding, configuring, testing and tuning, neither result is very good when it comes to NFS performance. We've gone so far as to run everything as noatime (ie local mount, nfs export, and nfs client mount) hoping for better performance. Have you updated to Centos 5.2 yet? And if so, did it improve NFS performance? -- Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
David Mackintosh wrote: > On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 09:08:15AM +0200, Rudi Ahlers wrote: > > Hi all > > > > I want to look at setting up a simple / cheap SAN / NAS server using > > normal PIV motherboard, 2GB (or even more) RAM, Core 2 Duo CPU (probably > > a Intel 6700 / 6750 / 6800) & some SATA HDD's (4 or 6x 320GB - 750GB). > > My budget is limited, so I can't afford a pre-built NAS device. > > My own experience: I have done two NAS systems using CentOS. One is > a HP DL585G1 with four 300GB drives using a hardware RAID-5. The > second is a Dell PowerEdge 2600 with four 300GB drives (software > raid-10) and two 32GB drives (software raid-1). > > One has a multi-core Opteron processor, the other has a high-end > Xeon processor with HT disabled. Both have 2GB of RAM. > > Both are used by high-demand compute processes as NFS servers. > > Despite a lot of fidding, configuring, testing and tuning, neither > result is very good when it comes to NFS performance. We've gone > so far as to run everything as noatime (ie local mount, nfs export, > and nfs client mount) hoping for better performance. > > In comparing the systems we tried the hardware-RAID5 first on the > assumption that HW-Raid5 is faster than SW-Raid, for a higher yield > than Raid-10. However we don't think that the elevator used in the > kernel makes intelligent stepping decisions on the HW-Raid5 because > it doesn't see the "real" geometry of the disks involved, only the > aparrent geometry of the RAID5 disk. > > The Software-Raid10 is better in some ways because the kernel sees > the real disk geometries. Performance is about on par with the > other computer, even though the other computer has the better CPU. > > Due to the hardware involved I couldn't try Solaris 10, but we have > had experiences in the past where the NFS server on Solaris was > significantly better than the NFS server in CentOS/RedHat, both in > terms of throughput and perceved latency under load. > > If I was doing it again, I'd push harder for a budget for a NetApp > filer. For what we are attempting to do, you get what you pay for. > > If I was doing it again with the budget restrictions, I'd probably > try Solaris with software raid. I would then try the *BSD family, > but only after Solaris because I have extensive Solaris experience. On Linux storage servers that use RAID try elevator=deadline for better io scheduling performance. The default 'cfq' scheduler is really designed for single-disk interactive workstation io patterns. -Ross __ This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy or printout thereof. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 09:08:15AM +0200, Rudi Ahlers wrote: > Hi all > > I want to look at setting up a simple / cheap SAN / NAS server using > normal PIV motherboard, 2GB (or even more) RAM, Core 2 Duo CPU (probably > a Intel 6700 / 6750 / 6800) & some SATA HDD's (4 or 6x 320GB - 750GB). > My budget is limited, so I can't afford a pre-built NAS device. My own experience: I have done two NAS systems using CentOS. One is a HP DL585G1 with four 300GB drives using a hardware RAID-5. The second is a Dell PowerEdge 2600 with four 300GB drives (software raid-10) and two 32GB drives (software raid-1). One has a multi-core Opteron processor, the other has a high-end Xeon processor with HT disabled. Both have 2GB of RAM. Both are used by high-demand compute processes as NFS servers. Despite a lot of fidding, configuring, testing and tuning, neither result is very good when it comes to NFS performance. We've gone so far as to run everything as noatime (ie local mount, nfs export, and nfs client mount) hoping for better performance. In comparing the systems we tried the hardware-RAID5 first on the assumption that HW-Raid5 is faster than SW-Raid, for a higher yield than Raid-10. However we don't think that the elevator used in the kernel makes intelligent stepping decisions on the HW-Raid5 because it doesn't see the "real" geometry of the disks involved, only the aparrent geometry of the RAID5 disk. The Software-Raid10 is better in some ways because the kernel sees the real disk geometries. Performance is about on par with the other computer, even though the other computer has the better CPU. Due to the hardware involved I couldn't try Solaris 10, but we have had experiences in the past where the NFS server on Solaris was significantly better than the NFS server in CentOS/RedHat, both in terms of throughput and perceved latency under load. If I was doing it again, I'd push harder for a budget for a NetApp filer. For what we are attempting to do, you get what you pay for. If I was doing it again with the budget restrictions, I'd probably try Solaris with software raid. I would then try the *BSD family, but only after Solaris because I have extensive Solaris experience. -- /\oo/\ / /()\ \ David Mackintosh | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.xdroop.com pgppfXMXeUUwf.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
>-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of >Rainer Duffner >Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 12:27 AM >To: CentOS mailing list >Subject: Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible? > >>>> Actually, the calculation is that it needs a GB of RAM for every >>>> TB of >> managed data. >> >> How do you reckon this? Ie, what's the basic assumption(s) for the >> statement? >> Parity calculations for stripes or what? I don't follow. >> >> I can't say I've ever heard any such like, so please do enlighten me! >> > > >It used to be written in the solarisinternals.com wiki - but I can't >seem to find it anymore. > >ZFS is a moving target, in some ways, so the requirements may have >changed or are no longer that simple. > >But it made sense in the early days, when SUN's thumper (X4500, 2*DC >Opteron, 48 disks, 16 GB RAM) more or less fit the requirements >perfectly. Gotcha', thx! smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
>-Original Message- >>> A cheap server: there are many different values of cheap; it all depends >>> on what you need it for. >>> >> >> Yupp, break down the requirements into the following three options: >> >> * Good >> * Fast >> * Cheap >> >> Pick any *two*. You can never ever have all three. It's a natural law or >> something. 8-) >> >Sure, SATA isn't as fast as SCSI, so I sacrifice that, but SCSI won't >give me the same space (3TB) as SATA either. So, a gigabyte mobo + 6x >1TB SATA HDD's + 4GB RAM + 2.8Ghz Core 2 Duo isn't too bad? I think your requirements above fall in under "cheap" and "fast". Good in this case is rather subjective, as SCSI is normally what you want for this kind of storage. At work I initially started out with raided scsi-drives for backups and file-servers whenever I could, but I've lately gone almost completely over to SATA2-drives with NCQ-features. I get almost the same performance, at a better price and the MTBF is normally quite good if you chose the right drive-brands. This too is fast and cheap, although with some caveats visavi longevity. I think however as long as you have some kind of backup-plan, this isn't really an issue. With that said, I'd also like to mention we don't do tape-backups any more. The data-mass is just to much. We use only online-backuping to hd and rotate the used space as necessary. What were you going to use this storage server for again? Some kind of user-homefolder area, backup or such like? On a different note, our users at the dept' have available a Windows Server for their homefolder-space. I run this on a low-end Fujitsu-Siemens Primergy Econel 100-server, with 3x 500GB SATA2/320-drives in Raid0-fashion. The 3x drives were actually more expensive than the whole server when I bought it some two years ago. The CPU is a Pentium D at 2,8GHz and has 2GB RAM IIRC. The price total for this solution was very competitive for us at the time in Sweden, so you might maybe want to look into the Fujitsu-range low-end server-line as well. The Econel-series are as I understand it a sort of hefty workstation-on-steroids with some server-features included, you kinda' get a server-workstation hybrid. Look into it and compare prices, you might find something there. IMHO, the Econel is the best Good/Cheap/Fast-combo you're likely to find. HTH. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Les Mikesell wrote: Are you pricing the low end NAS boxes (like Buffalo Linkstation/Terastation, etc.)? It might be hard to beat that if all you want is a file server. Most run Linux of some sort on ARM or PPC processors and may need to be hacked to add NFS or support >2gig files. I had an Infrant ReadyNAS NV+ last year (Now Netgear) which was supposed to be one of the fastest on the market (Cost about 800$ without drives). A cheaper home made NAS beated it hands down (Software RAID 5). See last paragraph of: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2008-April/097623.html The ReadyNAS was a cool little NAS with many services but i found it slow and choppy. It was a nice little case and the homebrew NAS was bigger indeed. But the homebrew has power to spare and can do much more. The ReadyNAS was supposed to get shell access but never made it before i sold it (WEB Manager only when i had it). Guy Boisvert, ing. IngTegration inc. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Am 29.06.2008 um 21:07 schrieb Sorin Srbu: -Original Message- Actually, the calculation is that it needs a GB of RAM for every TB of managed data. How do you reckon this? Ie, what's the basic assumption(s) for the statement? Parity calculations for stripes or what? I don't follow. I can't say I've ever heard any such like, so please do enlighten me! It used to be written in the solarisinternals.com wiki - but I can't seem to find it anymore. ZFS is a moving target, in some ways, so the requirements may have changed or are no longer that simple. But it made sense in the early days, when SUN's thumper (X4500, 2*DC Opteron, 48 disks, 16 GB RAM) more or less fit the requirements perfectly. cheers, Rainer -- Rainer Duffner CISSP, LPI, MCSE [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Les Mikesell wrote: Rudi Ahlers wrote: I mainly want to use it as a backup server for hosting servers, so I'll focus on FTP / SSH / SFTP / iSCSI (if possible), and maybe NFS - I don't want SMB (for security reasons). I'll probably also add Webmin to allow users to browse their backups via HTTPS, manage folders, etc. You might like backuppc (http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/) for a backup system that will let individual machine 'owners' browse/restore their own backups while using compression and linking all duplicate files to use much less disk space than you'd expect. There's some tradeoff in speed compared to straight rsync and it needs more CPU, but the disk savings and ease of use might be worth it. Yes, Backuppc is one of the programs we'll suggest :) The pooling won't have the same effect if you run many separate instances sharing the file server. If you run a single instance that backs up many machines, you only actually store one copy of each unique file and all duplicates become hardlinks to that instance whether the duplicates are found across hosts or in different runs of the same host. If these are real or virtual hosts you can give their owners web access to only their own host's backups. If you have virtual web sites on the same host you have to go through some contortions to split control but it is still possible. Yes, I realize that, but it would save space for those hosts who have more than 1 copy of the same file. Each account on the backup server will belong to one host / reseller / VPS owner. But it will also be used for Linux control panels like cPanel, Plesk, Webmin, etc which use traditional FTP backup (via local LAN only). And those won't have any pooling. I'm not too concerned about this :) -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers CEO, SoftDux Web: http://www.SoftDux.com Check out my technical blog, http://blog.softdux.com for Linux or other technical stuff, or visit http://www.WebHostingTalk.co.za for Web Hosting stuff ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Rudi Ahlers wrote: I mainly want to use it as a backup server for hosting servers, so I'll focus on FTP / SSH / SFTP / iSCSI (if possible), and maybe NFS - I don't want SMB (for security reasons). I'll probably also add Webmin to allow users to browse their backups via HTTPS, manage folders, etc. You might like backuppc (http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/) for a backup system that will let individual machine 'owners' browse/restore their own backups while using compression and linking all duplicate files to use much less disk space than you'd expect. There's some tradeoff in speed compared to straight rsync and it needs more CPU, but the disk savings and ease of use might be worth it. Yes, Backuppc is one of the programs we'll suggest :) The pooling won't have the same effect if you run many separate instances sharing the file server. If you run a single instance that backs up many machines, you only actually store one copy of each unique file and all duplicates become hardlinks to that instance whether the duplicates are found across hosts or in different runs of the same host. If these are real or virtual hosts you can give their owners web access to only their own host's backups. If you have virtual web sites on the same host you have to go through some contortions to split control but it is still possible. But it will also be used for Linux control panels like cPanel, Plesk, Webmin, etc which use traditional FTP backup (via local LAN only). And those won't have any pooling. -- Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
John R Pierce wrote: probably a /little/ expensive but not excessively so, you might check out the Intel 2U 'kit' servers, like http://developer.intel.com/design/servers/platforms/SR1500-2500/index.htm specifically, the SR2500LX configuration, oops, I meant SR2500ALLX :-/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Les Mikesell wrote: Rudi Ahlers wrote: I mainly want to use it as a backup server for hosting servers, so I'll focus on FTP / SSH / SFTP / iSCSI (if possible), and maybe NFS - I don't want SMB (for security reasons). I'll probably also add Webmin to allow users to browse their backups via HTTPS, manage folders, etc. You might like backuppc (http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/) for a backup system that will let individual machine 'owners' browse/restore their own backups while using compression and linking all duplicate files to use much less disk space than you'd expect. There's some tradeoff in speed compared to straight rsync and it needs more CPU, but the disk savings and ease of use might be worth it. Yes, Backuppc is one of the programs we'll suggest :) But it will also be used for Linux control panels like cPanel, Plesk, Webmin, etc which use traditional FTP backup (via local LAN only). -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers CEO, SoftDux Web: http://www.SoftDux.com Check out my technical blog, http://blog.softdux.com for Linux or other technical stuff, or visit http://www.WebHostingTalk.co.za for Web Hosting stuff ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Rudi Ahlers wrote: I mainly want to use it as a backup server for hosting servers, so I'll focus on FTP / SSH / SFTP / iSCSI (if possible), and maybe NFS - I don't want SMB (for security reasons). I'll probably also add Webmin to allow users to browse their backups via HTTPS, manage folders, etc. You might like backuppc (http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/) for a backup system that will let individual machine 'owners' browse/restore their own backups while using compression and linking all duplicate files to use much less disk space than you'd expect. There's some tradeoff in speed compared to straight rsync and it needs more CPU, but the disk savings and ease of use might be worth it. -- Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Rudi Ahlers wrote: Hi all I want to look at setting up a simple / cheap SAN / NAS server using normal PIV motherboard, 2GB (or even more) RAM, Core 2 Duo CPU (probably a Intel 6700 / 6750 / 6800) & some SATA HDD's (4 or 6x 320GB - 750GB). My budget is limited, so I can't afford a pre-built NAS device. Can this be done with CentOS? I've been looking FreeNAS (which is built on FreeBSD), and it look like a great project, but since the hardware support in FreeBSD is limit, I'd rather use Linux for it. Has anyone done this? If so, please share a bit in your experiences :) probably a /little/ expensive but not excessively so, you might check out the Intel 2U 'kit' servers, like http://developer.intel.com/design/servers/platforms/SR1500-2500/index.htm specifically, the SR2500LX configuration, this is a 2U rack server with 6 SAS/SATA bays using the S5000PAL motherboard, the base kit is about $1300, you add a CPU like an E5205 ($200), RAM to suit (up to 32GB ECC FBDRAM, $200 for 4GB), and drives. of course, if this is for HOME use, a rack mount server is probably NOT a good idea, they tend to be quite noisy. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Les Mikesell wrote: Rudi Ahlers wrote: I want to look at setting up a simple / cheap SAN / NAS server using normal PIV motherboard, 2GB (or even more) RAM, Core 2 Duo CPU (probably a Intel 6700 / 6750 / 6800) & some SATA HDD's (4 or 6x 320GB - 750GB). My budget is limited, so I can't afford a pre-built NAS device. Can this be done with CentOS? I've been looking FreeNAS (which is built on FreeBSD), and it look like a great project, but since the hardware support in FreeBSD is limit, I'd rather use Linux for it. You can use a stock Centos - just set up Samba if you are serving windows clients and NFS for Linux/Mac clients. The only thing even slightly difficult is keeping authentication and user mapping coordinated between the windows/linux sides. You can also run whatever else you might want (web/ftp/email/streaming media servers, etc.) or even run it as a workstation too. If you are serving mostly windows clients and don't need NFS, you might look at SME server (http://www.contribs.org) as something easier to set up. I mainly want to use it as a backup server for hosting servers, so I'll focus on FTP / SSH / SFTP / iSCSI (if possible), and maybe NFS - I don't want SMB (for security reasons). I'll probably also add Webmin to allow users to browse their backups via HTTPS, manage folders, etc. We already use SME Server 7.3 in the office, and it works great, but it doesn't support RAID 10, and needs min 6 drives for RAID 6, so I can't add a hot spare in this chassis. Also, ideally I'd like to run the OS from a USB memory stick / CDROM to keep it secure & fast to boot. I'll probably use LDAP authentication, with a seperate LDAP server, or maybe a separate IDE HDD / 16GB USB drive for authentication, still need to decide on this Has anyone done this? If so, please share a bit in your experiences :) Are you pricing the low end NAS boxes (like Buffalo Linkstation/Terastation, etc.)? It might be hard to beat that if all you want is a file server. Most run Linux of some sort on ARM or PPC processors and may need to be hacked to add NFS or support >2gig files. We're limited to the higher end equipment in our country, like Netgear, Dell, Sun, etc - which is too expensive IMO. A 4 drive 1U Netgear box without HDD's cost about $3500! -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers CEO, SoftDux Web: http://www.SoftDux.com Check out my technical blog, http://blog.softdux.com for Linux or other technical stuff, or visit http://www.WebHostingTalk.co.za for Web Hosting stuff ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Steve Tindall wrote: On Sun, 2008-06-29 at 19:16 +0200, Rudi Ahlers wrote: Unfortunately, the only ECC capable motherboards I can get my hands on will be XEON, which is much more expensive than a normal desktop type motherboard. And the CPU's will cost more. Consider using an Asus socket AM2 motherboard, as they support ECC. A popular choice is the Asus M2N-E with 6 SATA connectors (not to be confused with the M2N-E SLI), but any of the nforce 500-series Asus motherboard should work fine with CentOS. Modest AMD socket AM2 45watt dual cores are relatively cheap. Steve __ Thanx Steve, I don't see that mobo on my suppliers' price lists, but I'll shop around a bit -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers CEO, SoftDux Web: http://www.SoftDux.com Check out my technical blog, http://blog.softdux.com for Linux or other technical stuff, or visit http://www.WebHostingTalk.co.za for Web Hosting stuff ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Sorin Srbu wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Thompson Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 8:39 PM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible? A cheap server: there are many different values of cheap; it all depends on what you need it for. Yupp, break down the requirements into the following three options: * Good * Fast * Cheap Pick any *two*. You can never ever have all three. It's a natural law or something. 8-) ___ Sure, SATA isn't as fast as SCSI, so I sacrifice that, but SCSI won't give me the same space (3TB) as SATA either. So, a gigabyte mobo + 6x 1TB SATA HDD's + 4GB RAM + 2.8Ghz Core 2 Duo isn't too bad? -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers CEO, SoftDux Web: http://www.SoftDux.com Check out my technical blog, http://blog.softdux.com for Linux or other technical stuff, or visit http://www.WebHostingTalk.co.za for Web Hosting stuff ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
>-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of >Steve Thompson >Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 8:39 PM >To: CentOS mailing list >Subject: Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible? > > >A cheap server: there are many different values of cheap; it all depends >on what you need it for. Yupp, break down the requirements into the following three options: * Good * Fast * Cheap Pick any *two*. You can never ever have all three. It's a natural law or something. 8-) smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
>-Original Message- >> Actually, the calculation is that it needs a GB of RAM for every TB of managed data. How do you reckon this? Ie, what's the basic assumption(s) for the statement? Parity calculations for stripes or what? I don't follow. I can't say I've ever heard any such like, so please do enlighten me! smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
On Sun, 2008-06-29 at 19:16 +0200, Rudi Ahlers wrote: > Unfortunately, the only ECC capable motherboards I can get my > hands on will be XEON, which is much more expensive than a normal > desktop type motherboard. And the CPU's will cost more. Consider using an Asus socket AM2 motherboard, as they support ECC. A popular choice is the Asus M2N-E with 6 SATA connectors (not to be confused with the M2N-E SLI), but any of the nforce 500-series Asus motherboard should work fine with CentOS. Modest AMD socket AM2 45watt dual cores are relatively cheap. Steve ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
A cheap server: there are many different values of cheap; it all depends on what you need it for. For my home network, I just picked up a brand new Dell Poweredge PE2900 server (from Dell) with two quad-core 2.33 GHz processors, 24 GB memory and two 250 GB SATA disks for $2800. Price was too good to pass up for a system in this class. I am adding another four Seagate NS 750 GB SATA disks with caddies for about $550. Runs Centos 5.2 and a bunch (>20) of Xen DomU's. Steve ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Rudi Ahlers wrote: I want to look at setting up a simple / cheap SAN / NAS server using normal PIV motherboard, 2GB (or even more) RAM, Core 2 Duo CPU (probably a Intel 6700 / 6750 / 6800) & some SATA HDD's (4 or 6x 320GB - 750GB). My budget is limited, so I can't afford a pre-built NAS device. Can this be done with CentOS? I've been looking FreeNAS (which is built on FreeBSD), and it look like a great project, but since the hardware support in FreeBSD is limit, I'd rather use Linux for it. You can use a stock Centos - just set up Samba if you are serving windows clients and NFS for Linux/Mac clients. The only thing even slightly difficult is keeping authentication and user mapping coordinated between the windows/linux sides. You can also run whatever else you might want (web/ftp/email/streaming media servers, etc.) or even run it as a workstation too. If you are serving mostly windows clients and don't need NFS, you might look at SME server (http://www.contribs.org) as something easier to set up. Has anyone done this? If so, please share a bit in your experiences :) Are you pricing the low end NAS boxes (like Buffalo Linkstation/Terastation, etc.)? It might be hard to beat that if all you want is a file server. Most run Linux of some sort on ARM or PPC processors and may need to be hacked to add NFS or support >2gig files. -- Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Rainer Duffner wrote: Am 29.06.2008 um 09:08 schrieb Rudi Ahlers: Hi all I want to look at setting up a simple / cheap SAN / NAS server using normal PIV motherboard, 2GB (or even more) RAM, Core 2 Duo CPU (probably a Intel 6700 / 6750 / 6800) & some SATA HDD's (4 or 6x 320GB - 750GB). My budget is limited, so I can't afford a pre-built NAS device. Can this be done with CentOS? I've been looking FreeNAS (which is built on FreeBSD), and it look like a great project, but since the hardware support in FreeBSD is limit, I'd rather use Linux for it. What hardware do you own that is not supported? I haven's used FBSD (or any other BSD) since 4.9, and I know what hassles I had back then with some NIC's. But, it's worth a try. This is a Linux list, so I didn't think a BSD suggestion would come from it :) Has anyone done this? If so, please share a bit in your experiences :) While it can certainly be done with CentOS, I'd take a look at Solaris/OpenSolaris for that purpose. ZFS really beats anything else out there. But you need a lot of RAM. 2 GB is good, 4 GB would be better ;-) Actually, the calculation is that it needs a GB of RAM for every TB of managed data. So, if RAM is scarce and the feature of ZFS are not needed (for whatever reason), CentOS may be still be a good option. cheers, Rainer I don't know Solaris. At all. I've never seen it (i.e. file & directory structure, security, kernel, etc). Apart from ZFS, what else would I gain? Can ZFS work on Linux? If not, I'm sure I could give Solaris a shot. 1GB per TB? mm, ok. This is my first attempt to this, so there's still a lot to learn. With 6 SATA slots available (2U case), I would probably only have about 3 - 4TB available (depending on whether I got for RAID 6 or 10) - so I would really only need 4GB RAM, but I'm sure if I spend a bit more cash on the mobo, I could get one that supports 8TB. I currently have a PC, with 4GB DDRII 667 RAM, i6750 CPU & some 160GB HDD's, but want to replace the HDD's at some stage when I have more cash. -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers CEO, SoftDux Web: http://www.SoftDux.com Check out my technical blog, http://blog.softdux.com for Linux or other technical stuff, or visit http://www.WebHostingTalk.co.za for Web Hosting stuff ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
John R Pierce wrote: Rudi Ahlers wrote: Hi all I want to look at setting up a simple / cheap SAN / NAS server using normal PIV motherboard, 2GB (or even more) RAM, Core 2 Duo CPU (probably a Intel 6700 / 6750 / 6800) & some SATA HDD's (4 or 6x 320GB - 750GB). My budget is limited, so I can't afford a pre-built NAS device. Can this be done with CentOS? I've been looking FreeNAS (which is built on FreeBSD), and it look like a great project, but since the hardware support in FreeBSD is limit, I'd rather use Linux for it. Has anyone done this? If so, please share a bit in your experiences :) you might look at openfiler, too. same idea as opennas, only its linux based. web management interface, supports NFS and CIFS/SMB sharing, etc etc. IMHO, a storage server really /should/ have ECC memory to minimize the potential for data corruption by random memory errors. this, however, requires a server chipset, as 99% of desktop stuff doesn't support ECC at all. you are, btw, way overspecing the cpu. a storage server would be fine with a much slower processor than any of those. ___ What kind of processing does the NAS server really do? I mean, it won't do actual calculations / DB access / etc, those will all be done by the host OS / server, right? For the price difference, the bigger CPU is a better investment, which could also be reused for something else (xen server?) if this doesn't work out. Unfortunately, the only ECC capable motherboards I can get my hands on will be XEON, which is much more expensive than a normal desktop type motherboard. And the CPU's will cost more. -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers CEO, SoftDux Web: http://www.SoftDux.com Check out my technical blog, http://blog.softdux.com for Linux or other technical stuff, or visit http://www.WebHostingTalk.co.za for Web Hosting stuff ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Iv'e done a NAS with centos 5.2 here. Specs are: Portwell WADE 8056 board with Intel Core2Duo 2,4GHZ, 4GB (2x 2GB kingston DDR2 667), 4x 500GB Samsung SATA2 HDD's and a very nice Chenbro ES34069 NAS case. The board only supports SoftRaid, so i made a raid 5 software based on centos. The NAS runs very fine. But u dont have any kind of webinterface, i managed all over Samba (MediaCenter is a Windows System). You can also use NFS or FTP. Here on my Macbook all fileaccess runs fine with Samba shares. The only reason why i use a Core2Duo is because is have some other XEN virtual machines running on that NAS. Centos 5.2 is running also very nice and fast on a Intel D945GCLF board with ATOM CPU build in (1.6GHZ),but this board only have 1 IDE and 2 SATA connectors, on the other side is needs much lower power then the other and its very fast. This board needs for LAN connections a driver from RealTek homepage!! Otherwise Centos 5.2 is crashing by loading the installer. You can read about it here: http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/HardwareList/RealTekRTL8101 Greetings Shade Rudi Ahlers schrieb: > Hi all > > I want to look at setting up a simple / cheap SAN / NAS server using normal PIV motherboard, 2GB (or even more) RAM, Core 2 Duo CPU (probably a Intel 6700 / 6750 / 6800) & some SATA HDD's (4 or 6x 320GB - 750GB). My budget is limited, so I can't afford a pre-built NAS device. > > Can this be done with CentOS? I've been looking FreeNAS (which is built on FreeBSD), and it look like a great project, but since the hardware support in FreeBSD is limit, I'd rather use Linux for it. > > Has anyone done this? If so, please share a bit in your experiences :) > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkhna6UACgkQaH0wtXEw1Ms4tACfUaDjoed3CBAu9cF4Kx3jQmMH CcgAn3yfBOdDIJeVdV9iHYcOsnFVcUzc =/WdD -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Am 29.06.2008 um 09:08 schrieb Rudi Ahlers: Hi all I want to look at setting up a simple / cheap SAN / NAS server using normal PIV motherboard, 2GB (or even more) RAM, Core 2 Duo CPU (probably a Intel 6700 / 6750 / 6800) & some SATA HDD's (4 or 6x 320GB - 750GB). My budget is limited, so I can't afford a pre- built NAS device. Can this be done with CentOS? I've been looking FreeNAS (which is built on FreeBSD), and it look like a great project, but since the hardware support in FreeBSD is limit, I'd rather use Linux for it. What hardware do you own that is not supported? Has anyone done this? If so, please share a bit in your experiences :) While it can certainly be done with CentOS, I'd take a look at Solaris/OpenSolaris for that purpose. ZFS really beats anything else out there. But you need a lot of RAM. 2 GB is good, 4 GB would be better ;-) Actually, the calculation is that it needs a GB of RAM for every TB of managed data. So, if RAM is scarce and the feature of ZFS are not needed (for whatever reason), CentOS may be still be a good option. cheers, Rainer -- Rainer Duffner CISSP, LPI, MCSE [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] settings up cheap a NAS / SAN server, is it possible?
Rudi Ahlers wrote: Hi all I want to look at setting up a simple / cheap SAN / NAS server using normal PIV motherboard, 2GB (or even more) RAM, Core 2 Duo CPU (probably a Intel 6700 / 6750 / 6800) & some SATA HDD's (4 or 6x 320GB - 750GB). My budget is limited, so I can't afford a pre-built NAS device. Can this be done with CentOS? I've been looking FreeNAS (which is built on FreeBSD), and it look like a great project, but since the hardware support in FreeBSD is limit, I'd rather use Linux for it. Has anyone done this? If so, please share a bit in your experiences :) you might look at openfiler, too. same idea as opennas, only its linux based. web management interface, supports NFS and CIFS/SMB sharing, etc etc. IMHO, a storage server really /should/ have ECC memory to minimize the potential for data corruption by random memory errors. this, however, requires a server chipset, as 99% of desktop stuff doesn't support ECC at all. you are, btw, way overspecing the cpu. a storage server would be fine with a much slower processor than any of those. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
