I saw mashie's uDat come up a few posts ago and had to mention this.
Exactly a year ago now I built my pDat, a uDat clone.
Here is a work log: http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=845672
It works exceptionally well however I have had some terrible heat
problems...3 drive failures. It is a
First of all, I'd like to thank y'all for the very informative thread. I
hope other people find it useful.
On my end, after mulling things over and feeling quite lazy about the
linux rtfm requirement, I've decided to go with a
pins-and-needles-and-mac setup. I'm going to use firewire drives
attac
dem Wrote:
> Yikes, that does suck.
>
> A couple years ago I built my own NAS box using a Mini-ITX board, a
> 3ware RAID card, and 4 Seagate 160 GB PATA drives (which seemed huge at
> the time) running Fedora Linux. One of the drives failed after a few
> months and I was able to replace it with
Yes, you're absolutely right. Sorry, brain spazz on my end.
On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 11:01 -0500, Jim Dibb wrote:
> To make a small correction to what's below, you do not have to read
> the same sector from every other drive to write to one drive. You
> only have to read the sector you are writing
panaflo fans are the best - period - end of discussion. each size (80mm,
92mm etc etc) has 3 speeds you can get - the low speed units provide
MORE than enough airflow for most applications. panaflo is more
expensive but they are VERY quite and last forever.
here endith the lesson.
--
jackaninn
stinkingpig Wrote:
> [color=blue]24x7 use is not that big a factor in my opinion, the
> heat of 4 drives in a case designed for 1 hdd and some removable media
> drives is more likely what kills the drives.
sorry, not true from my experience. if a drive runs 24/7 for 2-3 years
you really get a
To make a small correction to what's below, you do not have to read the
same sector from every other drive to write to one drive. You
only have to read the sector you are writing to and the
corresponding parity sector. So, there's still a penalty, but not
as large as what's suggested below.On 11
>
> stinkingpig Wrote:
>>
>> More about pain and suffering:
>> 1) rebuilding a RAID 5 array after losing a drive takes a very long
>> time.
>> Like days and days. I haven't tried it with a SOHO RAID card and some
>> el
>> cheapo IDE drives, but top-of-the-line HPAQ and Dell cards with fast
>> SCSI
On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 01:50 -0800, trebejo wrote:
> I'm surprised at how little you guys care for the RAID 5 idea.
...
> Anyway, back to the RAID issue. Doesn't the RAID do something about the
> occasional hard drive death? Like, if one dies, I can replace it and not
> lose any data? Yeah, sure, t
stinkingpig Wrote:
>
> More about pain and suffering:
> 1) rebuilding a RAID 5 array after losing a drive takes a very long
> time.
> Like days and days. I haven't tried it with a SOHO RAID card and some
> el
> cheapo IDE drives, but top-of-the-line HPAQ and Dell cards with fast
> SCSI
> drives
...
> I'm surprised at how little you guys care for the RAID 5 idea. My
...
> Anyway, back to the RAID issue. Doesn't the RAID do something about the
> occasional hard drive death? Like, if one dies, I can replace it and not
> lose any data? Yeah, sure, the big fire hits and all bets are off, but
>
On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 01:50 -0800, trebejo wrote:
> I've been withholding a reply to avoid thread fragmentation...
Dreamer.
> wrt what I meant by "headless", I meant at the very least that it would
> run unattended without a monitor or keyboard. If it can reboot
> unattended and so forth that's a
http://www.mashie.org/casemods/udat1.html
--
bernt
bernt's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1342
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=18555
_
trebejo Wrote:
> I'm surprised at how little you guys care for the RAID 5 idea. My
> problem is that at the moment I've got a couple of those external
> seagates (nice quiet gadgets and they look nice btw) and between the
> two of 'em they combine 700gb of room (ok 640gb actually) and they have
>
@ceejay: From my experience raid 5 (better raid 6) is vital when you
have a certain number of drives. during the last 4 years I had about 2
drive faliures a year on a total amount of about 15 drives running in
total. This seems to be true regarless what kind of drive generation or
manufacturer you
I've been withholding a reply to avoid thread fragmentation...
Very informative comments to y'all, thanks. Nice backup scripts. LA's
too far away from DC, Pat, otherwise I'd take you up on the offer.
btw I agree about the *BSD v. linux approachable interface issues, but
it should be mentioned at
I have a setup where "give me maximum capacity for the money" is the key
objective. Therefore, I didn't go with a NAS because they are going to
be quite expensive when you realize 2 + 1 TB as I did. However, here
are my experiences with these servers, one having 14x160 GB harddisks
in linux softwa
An interesting discussion, the only drawback of which is that it covers
so many points that this thread could very quickly fragment! Never
mind, its a very good question, so here's my bit...
At the risk of repeating old RAID / non-RAID discussions, I'm not at
all convinced that RAID is a good in
trebejo Wrote:
> The reason that I haven't yet plunked down the cash for an Infrant box
> is that I'm not sure whether I'll be happy with it for reasons having
> to do with cpu cycles and noise. Since these boxes are not available
> for review at your local Fry's, you basically have to dive in an
19 matches
Mail list logo
