Thoughts about low power/low noise/high performance custom-built NAS?

[Zarch]

I currently have a Synology CS407. Its the 4 bay version, is 2 years old and have 4 x 320gb drives in it configured in RAID 5.

Sadly, the read/write performance is not cutting it anymore. (25MB/sec read, 15MB/sec write)

I think i've come to realise that i don't need 4 drives with the low cost of 1tb drives and my storage requirements should be satisfied by just one of those.

I do have around 40gb or "critical" data that i need to take a 2nd copy of, so this is what i'm thinking about.

1 x system disk.
1 x data disk.

System disk will hold the OS and a mirror copy of my critical data. This could be a 2.5" drive or maybe a 3.5" if i've got something knocking about. I bet i'd get by with 100gb here. (to allow for critical data expansion)

Data disk will be a new 1tb Samsung SpinPoint F3 as I want to harness the power of that 110MB/Sec performance!

So i'd mirror my critical data between the two drives, with the Samsung as the primary access drive and the other just a non-accessed copy.

Whilst i've got unix experience, i'm thinking of using WHS as it appears pretty straightforward to configure for my needs.

The hardware that will be connecting to the NAS is a Mac Mini, MacBook and a soon to be built replacement PC running Windows 7. (and maybe Hackintosh in the future).

My current PC only has a PCI based gigabit card and is throttled at 33MB/Sec, hence a new motherboard coming.

The Mac Mini and PC will be connecting to my NetGear GS508 gigabit switch and both machine will provide full gigabit bandwidth. (well i perf on the Mac suggest it does - 111MB/Sec). I'm hoping the same from the PC as its a Intel board with a RealTek ethernet chip on. (should be here in next few days).

I want to use the NAS more like a local drive, so i'm looking to get the best performance i can out of the new NAS. I had considered a new Synology DS209 with 60MB/Sec read/write, but seeing as I don't use anything more than file shares, i think i can build something cheaper myself and hopefully similar, if not better performance.

So the main decision i'm stuck on is the motherboard and case. I have read reviews of the little intel D945GCLF2 (little falls 2) board and its onboard 1.6ghz Atom chip. The biggest question i've got about this and ANY board is...... "what throughput can the board give me".

With low power consumption and low noise, the Intel looks a cracking little solution. But can it perform?

Anyone got any real word stats for this board?

I suppose the other option is to go for a mATX solution with a low energy, low spec proc. (either AMD or Intel). But again, the board has to be able to provide throughput.

Again, any recommendations?

Is it unreasonable to expect to get anywhere near the full 100MB/Sec the single Samsung drive can provide?

And my final query is around power. If a build a system with 2 drives, a motherboard and not much else. What sort of PSU should i go for? I read about "energy efficient", but what exactly does that mean and what should I look for?

Looking forward to replies and thoughts on ANY of the above questions.

Many Thanks

 

[thiggins]

You should not rely on a single device for both primary data store and backup. At minimum you should run scheduled backup to an attached drive and preferably run scheduled backup to another networked device.

To get performance above 70 MB/s or so, you'll need to be running a RAID 0 array on your client and using an OS like Vista SP1 or Win7 that can do network transfers with > 64K blocks.

An Atom based NAS will get you in the 40- 50 MB/s range.
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/nas/...ur-own-atom-based-nas-part-2?showall=&start=5

 

[Zarch]

Thanks for the reply.

I backup my critical stuff to a daily Internet based solution. (idrive)

 

[Jay_S]

An Atom based NAS will get you in the 40- 50 MB/s range.
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/nas/...ur-own-atom-based-nas-part-2?showall=&start=5

Tim - I just re-read that article. What sort of CPU utilization was IOZone reporting? I remember reading reviews of that original Atom, where it was actually slower than the Celeron-based D201GLY2A that it replaced.

The Atom board used in Tim's article is compromised at least 2 ways - by the CPU's lack of processing power, and by the need to use a PCI gigabit NIC.

There are newer dual-core Atom boards with on-board gigabit NICs that might make for a good "re-match" article. I'm thinking of the $90 Asus AT3GC-I.

Intel finally got it right with their latest D945GSEJT - they're finally using the mobile 945G chipset. 12W idle! It remains to be seen if the single-core Atom is sufficient. I have one of those in a "wish list" for my music server re-build. I'll never need huge throughput, but I'll test it of course!

 

[thiggins]

iozone does not report the target machine's CPU itilization. Only the CPU of the machine iozone is running on.

 

[Zarch]

An Atom based NAS will get you in the 40- 50 MB/s range.
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/nas/...ur-own-atom-based-nas-part-2?showall=&start=5

Tim,

Your Atom self build was based on the older D945GCLF board with only a "230" Atom chip and 100Mbit ethernet so you subsequently used an external gigabit card........... Was the enternal card throttled by the PCI bus?

Would the newer D945GCLF2 board perform better with its onboard gigabit ethernet and 330 Atom chip?

 

[Jay_S]

iozone does not report the target machine's CPU itilization. Only the CPU of the machine iozone is running on.

Ah, of course - I forgot about that detail. I suppose you could remotely monitor CPU utilization with top or htop through a SSH/telnet connection. Though it's probably too late for that now

Would the newer D945GCLF2 board perform better with its onboard gigabit ethernet and 330 Atom chip?

I suspect it would. I'll have a D945GSEJT soon (soon = when I can sell off some other gear!). It's still a single-core Atom, but it does have a PCIe Realtek gigabit NIC. I'll try to do a comprehensive review when I get it.

 

[Zarch]

I suspect it would. I'll have a D945GSEJT soon (soon = when I can sell off some other gear!). It's still a single-core Atom, but it does have a PCIe Realtek gigabit NIC. I'll try to do a comprehensive review when I get it.

Sounds great Jay. Get selling that gear!

 

[Zarch]

Question for you guys.

I've read lots of threads on here where XP file copy performance isn't a patch on Vista and Win 7.

But where would you put Leopard/Snow Leopard in comparison to Xp/Vista? Anyone done any Mac testing?

 

[Zarch]

Part of me is swaying back towards just getting the Synology DS209.

The unit and 2 x 1tb Spinpoint F3's come in at £322 with hibernation at 10W and access power draw at 25W.

Its convenient and provides the raid 1 protection i'd ideally like. (creating the same via WHS or a linux based unit seems a faff the more i read about it)

I'm worried that a 60+ MB/Sec DIY NAS will a) Cost near as much and b) draw more power and c) make more noise.

If i go mATX route the board is about £50, CPU around £30, Memory £30 for 2GB.

I'd need a small 2.5" drive for the OS, so 2nd hand about £25, then i'd need my 2 x 1.5tb Spinpoints (£56 each).

So without a case and PSU, thats £247.

Even going the mITX route doesn't save me that much more.

I have got some spare kit knocking about, but sadly none of it is along the lines or what i need. ie the spare motherboard I have doesn't have gigabit ethernet, so i'd need to buy a PCIe card there.... more cost/power etc. The hard drives aren't what i need either.

Anyone want to convince me otherwise?

 

[msl]

If the funtionality of an off-the-shelf (rather than DIY) NAS suits your needs then I think that is the route I would take personally. Tim's benchmarks look like the DS209 should give you the read/write performance boost you're looking for.

 

[Zarch]

If the funtionality of an off-the-shelf (rather than DIY) NAS suits your needs then I think that is the route I would take personally. Tim's benchmarks look like the DS209 should give you the read/write performance boost you're looking for.

Thanks MSL, don't get me wrong, i love tinkering.... but i'd rather not tinker for tinkerings sake..... and if the there is little difference cash wise, the DS209 looks favourite.

Would like to hear other peoples opinions.

Anyone want to buy a CS407 with 4 x 320gb Samsungs in??

 

[Zarch]

For info, i installed WHS last night on a current PC (2ghz E4400, 2gb ram on an intel board) and instantly got 60MB/Sec transfer speeds (which was the speed limit on the data drive i used). So i'm sure I could squeeze a little more out of it with a new 100+MB/Sec drive!!

It does look very simple to implement. I'm just worried about data protection, cost and power requirements compared to the 10w/25w of the Synology.

I'd either have to buy a raid card for my raid 1 requirement(or get a motherboard with one on).
Or use the WHS folder synchronization option and take the apparent write performance hit. And as i want to use it more as a read/write drive rather than just a streaming drive, this worries me.