DIY NAS style fileserver

[AaronD]

Hi

I've been following the DIY Nas / FileServer threads here with interest, especially Let's talk about DIY build it yourself NAS style fileserver. And I reckon it may be what I have to do. I have posted regarding my current dilemma here Help/Advice sought Do I need a NAS/Server/Both ? as well:

About 2 years ago, I built a Lian Li based PC (single core high end AMD), where the Raid controller is on the Asus Mobo (2 x Sata), which I reckon I could adapt to serve as a Windows Server / NAS.

My questions are:

• Do I really need a Dual Core processor ?
• Is using the MOBO Raid controller (I am only using Raid 1 - striping), as good/reliable as a shop bought Nas, or as good as a separate Raid Controller card ?
• If I install Windows Server 2003/2008 - will File sharing speed suffer, if I am running several Server programs (SQL Server, etc) at the same time on the NAS/Server ?

If there are any other considerations that I am unaware of, please let me know - as I am not 100% sure what makes a good Self Build Nas/Server. One point I need to mention is that I do not want to be spending a fortune on this. If this has already been covered elsewhere - then please point me in the right direction.

BTW: I have decided to buy a ReadyMade NAS (Synology or QNAP) for all the home stuff, and this Self Build Nas/Server for the business stuff. I don't know if it makes sense, but it is the only solution I can come up with.

Thanks for your help.

cheers
Aaron

 

[thiggins]

Have you read any of the Fast NAS series articles? Lots of info there, including performance data.

CPU and memory selection depends on the performance you want.

Why a DIY NAS for business and a commercial NAS for home.

What is "a fortune"?

 

[AaronD]

Hi Tim

Thanks for your reply, I have just read all your Fast Nas Series of articles. Really informative, easy to understand and damn helpful.

I realise that buying a manufactured NAS for home and a DIY Server/NAS for work, seems back to front. But we need a home NAS for all of our photos/music/code library/docs etc. They are all over the place, as we used to use a Netgear SC101 for storage, which broke, giving me six weeks of hell trying to sort it out to get the data back (which I did), before slinging it in the bin. So the data went back to each owner, until I sort out a Nas or Server. So it's now on a Mac, the three laptops and an external HDD as backup.
At the moment, I need to stem expenditure on kit, not ramp it up ! If the business is a success, then I will invest in warrantied server hardware, but it is not something I can justify right now.

What is a fortune ? I specced up a mid spec Dell Server online, and came away with a price of approx £1400.

So I figured, I will adapt what I have to hand.

Performance is not a high priority, although I wouldn't want it to be slow

 

[thiggins]

For the DIY machine, I would look at Windows Home Server, if 10 clients maximum is ok. Easy to install on any Windows-compatible machine and comes with backup clients. You can add storage as you need it and it can also do media serving if you want. Performance is decent, too. And the User Interface beats the hell out of any open source solution. WHS costs about $100 U.S.

Of course if you want to spend more and have more advanced needs, Server 2008 will also do the trick.

 

[00Roush]

Hi

I've been following the DIY Nas / FileServer threads here with interest, especially Let's talk about DIY build it yourself NAS style fileserver. And I reckon it may be what I have to do. I have posted regarding my current dilemma here Help/Advice sought Do I need a NAS/Server/Both ? as well:

About 2 years ago, I built a Lian Li based PC (single core high end AMD), where the Raid controller is on the Asus Mobo (2 x Sata), which I reckon I could adapt to serve as a Windows Server / NAS.

My questions are:

• Do I really need a Dual Core processor ?
• Is using the MOBO Raid controller (I am only using Raid 1 - striping), as good/reliable as a shop bought Nas, or as good as a separate Raid Controller card ?
• If I install Windows Server 2003/2008 - will File sharing speed suffer, if I am running several Server programs (SQL Server, etc) at the same time on the NAS/Server ?

If there are any other considerations that I am unaware of, please let me know - as I am not 100% sure what makes a good Self Build Nas/Server. One point I need to mention is that I do not want to be spending a fortune on this. If this has already been covered elsewhere - then please point me in the right direction.

BTW: I have decided to buy a ReadyMade NAS (Synology or QNAP) for all the home stuff, and this Self Build Nas/Server for the business stuff. I don't know if it makes sense, but it is the only solution I can come up with.

Thanks for your help.

cheers
Aaron

I would say the computer you mentioned you could reuse would work just fine. Just as long as it is one of the faster single cores. I say this because I know my old 1.8 Ghz Athlon 64 3000+ server had high CPU usage on network file transfers that were running at 70-90 MB/sec. My current server has a Opteron 165 (1.8Ghz dual core) and CPU usage is much lower while file transfer speeds have increased. I recommend using a dual core if possible but if your single core is on the higher end I wouldn't worry about it too much.

Your onboard RAID is most likely just as good as most of the NAS units out there. The RAID controller cards are usually much better at complex RAID setups and generally have better performance under heavy load. So for high performance of RAID 5 or 6 a add in card is usually necessary. For a simple RAID 1 setup, onboard RAID seems to work just as well as any other. At least in my opinion.

I imagine if you were running SQL Server along with other server services you might see a drop in speed but it would most likely be minimal. This is assuming these services are not using massive amounts of CPU time.

I would say test it out on your current hardware. I believe you could install Win 2003 server and not activate it so that you can test things out.

00Roush

 

[AaronD]

Hi Tim

10 Clients max is ok, but that sounds like the usual Windows Desktop File Sharing restriction ? Is WHS considered a REAL Server OS ?

I have Windows Server 2003, from my MSDN pack, is there a compelling reason to go for WHS instead of this ?

Media streaming would be a nice bonus from all of this, but unfortunately - due to the size of this Server/NAS, my wife won't be too keen on it being situated near the TV !
I could extend the budget for a smaller case - is there one anyone can recommend ?

Windows Server 2008 (@ £850) is too rich for me right now.

Many thanks for your help.

cheers
Aaron

 

[thiggins]

Windows Home Server is built on the same codebase as Windows Server 2003 SP2. It is much easier to administrate, however, and uses Drive Extender and Volume Shadow copy instead of RAID.

Basically, it's much easier to deal with than the full Windows Server OSes.

 

[AaronD]

Thanks 00Roush for that.

I will spec up a Dual Core board, processor and heatsink and see if it makes sense financially.

As I cannot rememebr the exact AMD CPU I went for, all I remember is that it was the best combination of bang for my buck. It may even be the 1.8 Ghz Athlon 64 3000+ that you mentioned.

Thanks Tim,for the extra feedback on WHS. I will definitely consider it now. How does it all work if I set up the two SATA disks as Raid 1 in the BIOS, if WHS doesn't use RAID ? Is the WHS approach more resilient than RAID ?

Confused again

cheers
Aaron

 

[thiggins]

Thanks Tim,for the extra feedback on WHS. I will definitely consider it now. How does it all work if I set up the two SATA disks as Raid 1 in the BIOS, if WHS doesn't use RAID ? Is the WHS approach more resilient than RAID ?

WHS takes an entirely different approach than RAID. Give this Microsoft technical brief a read-through to see if the approach works for you.

 

[00Roush]

If you already have Windows Server 2003 I say use it. WHS is basically a stripped down version of Windows Server 2003. Also if you already know XP/2003 it would probably be easier for you to setup the services that you want versus having to learn how to do the same thing in WHS. That is just my opinion though and I have not yet used WHS.

You should be able to spec out a dual core AMD CPU, motherboard, and RAM for under $200. Maybe even under $175.

00Roush

 

[bigclaw]

Does anybody know if Windows Server 2008 has the capability to back up client PCs like WHS? I cannot find any relevant information about it.

 

[AaronD]

Quad vs Dual Core

Firstly thank you to Tim and 00Roush, huge thank you for taking the time out to reply to my questions.

A good friend if mine, who upgrades his System, with a frequency unmatched by anyone I know, has offered me one of these "Intel Quad core Pro Q6600 2.4ghz", as he is about to upgarde to something shinier and newer. (I appreciate that I know I will have to purchase a new MOBO, so there is more expense involved.)

Now i know the theory that "more is always better", but will a Quad Core, provide a significant performance improvement over a Dual Core ?

Is it overkill for the purpose ?

many thanks
Aaron