Jump to content



Photo

Input Needed on Home/Work Server

help home server server storage raid

  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 goatsniffer

goatsniffer

    Supercalifragilisticexpialidosh

  • Joined: 11-January 04
  • Location: New York, USA

Posted 20 May 2013 - 03:57

I currently have a server setup at my home office that I user for both business and personal use. The business portion comes down to non-critical data archival. The personal use comes down to file storage of my media and game collection, personal backups, Hyper-V for web server (testing code) and always on machine for torrenting. I wanted to ask the community here for some input on a decision regarding my storage configuration.

I will start by giving the specifications for the server.

CPU: Core 2 Quad Q9550 2.83GHz
Memory: 8GB (4 x 2GB) DDR2-800
Power Supply: 500W http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817703015
Storage: 4 x 2TB Western Digital RE4-GP http://www.newegg.co...N82E16822136365
Storage: 3 x 3TB Western Digital Red http://www.newegg.co...N82E16822236344
Storage: 1 x 1TB Western Digital Black http://www.newegg.co...N82E16822136284
Storage: 1 x 1TB Western Digital Green http://www.newegg.co...N82E16822136151
RAID Controller: 3ware 9650SE-4LPML w/ BBU http://www.newegg.co...N82E16816116042
RAID Controller: Highpoint RocketRAID 2720SGL http://www.newegg.co...N82E16816115100
Backplane Module: 2 x ICY DOCK 5-in-3 (10 Actively Cooled Bays) http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817994028
OS: Windows Server 2008 R2

Storage Configuration:

Disk: 1 x 1TB Western Digital Black via On-Board SATA II (40GB System Partition, 960GB for Applications, Hyper-V States)
Disk: 1 x 1TB Western Digital Green via On-Board SATA II (1000GB for General Storage, Unimportant Backups)
Disk: 4 x 2TB Western Digital RE4-GP via 3ware SATA II (RAID5)(6000GB for Media Archive, Hyper-V Disks, Important Backups, Backup of Business Records)
Disk: 3 x 3TB Western Digital Red via HighPoint SATA III (RAID5)(6000GB for Game Library Archive)

I have been reading quite a bit about the problems with RAID5 and have a scratching in the back of my mind to reinitalize my 4 x 2TB Array to RAID10. Setting up two striped mirrors will increase the performance of the array, and some argue the reliability, but I will be left with a 4TB volume instead of the current 6TB. I use this drive to keep things I feel I cannot lose. The array is using a highly rated controller with a battery backup unit and enterprise class drives with TLER code. I have replaced two failed drives in the array so far without problem, but I am reading so many negative things about RAID5 and am starting to wonder how safe my data is.

My stance is this: My array is using 4 disks. At this size, my data is lost if any two drives fail before a rebuild can be completed regardless of raid level. The advantage of RAID5 being I have increased capacity. The advantage of RAID10 being faster data access and faster rebuild time.

What does the community here recommend? Would you trust your critical data on this system?

Thank you in advance for your input :)


#2 The_Observer

The_Observer

    Apples, Bananas, Rhinoceros!

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 12-April 05
  • Location: New Zealand
  • OS: OS X 10.9
  • Phone: iPhone5s

Posted 20 May 2013 - 04:17

I have this setup

120SSD for Sever2012
4x 500gig in RAID10 for Hyper-V machines. (3-8 machines running)

i have a 4 2.5" into 1 5.25" drive bay works great.

I have 6 3TB WD Red drive on RAID10 for 9TB of space. This is just for media. i like this case of the rebuild time and faster data access (have 5-7 devices steaming media around the house)

Recommend separated HD for Hyper-V machines.

#3 tim_s

tim_s

    Default

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 07-January 13
  • OS: OSX (Macbook Pro i7), Windows 7 (Gaming), Gentoo
  • Phone: iPhone 5s

Posted 22 May 2013 - 20:37

RAID != Backup
.
.
This would be the first item I would address and IF I was to attempt to use RAID as an almost real-time solution, I would not use RAID in 5 or 10 BUT IF you must due to the other benefits than the obvious choice would be RAID 10.

At my home, I do in fact use a RAID to over-come single points of failure but I also have snap-shots of the hard drive being captured, this way - IF a moment of craziness was to occur with data loss, the RAID would be effected by my snap shot would not.

*Some thoughts to consider*

#4 +Scott Hellewell

Scott Hellewell

    Software Developer

  • Joined: 15-October 08
  • Location: Phoenix, AZ USA
  • OS: Windows 8, Android
  • Phone: Evo 4G LTE

Posted 22 May 2013 - 20:56

You are fine to use RAID 5, and I would suggest it over RAID 1 or RAID 10 based on experiences I have had in the past.

I have had a situation where a RAID 10 array decided that something was wrong and stopped writing to 2 of the drives. Not having a good solution to notify of the problem, the computer was restarted 2 weeks later and the RAID controller decided it was the other 2 drives that were bad.

All of a sudden the server data was all 2 weeks old and no one knew what had happened.

My suggestion is to go with RAID 6 when possible and on SSDs for speed.

I also do my backups to disk as well. I do a setup that is Disk (Original) to Disk (Backup) to Disk (Off-site Backup).

I use 24 512GB SSDs in RAID 6 arrays for primary storage.
Then 12 4TB drives in RAID 6 for primary and offsite backup storage.

#5 TPreston

TPreston

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 2
  • Joined: 18-July 12
  • Location: Ireland
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Enterprise & Server 2012R2/08R2 Datacenter
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 1520

Posted 22 May 2013 - 21:10

Why not just get a Norco server case instead of the external hdd docks ?

#6 The_Observer

The_Observer

    Apples, Bananas, Rhinoceros!

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 12-April 05
  • Location: New Zealand
  • OS: OS X 10.9
  • Phone: iPhone5s

Posted 22 May 2013 - 21:13

I use 24 512GB SSDs in RAID 6 arrays for primary storage.
Then 12 4TB drives in RAID 6 for primary and offsite backup storage.


WOW would love to know what sort of reason you need this for? Price must be amazing!

#7 sc302

sc302

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 33
  • Joined: 12-July 05
  • Location: NJ, USA

Posted 22 May 2013 - 21:21

RAID ≠ Backup
.
.
This would be the first item I would address and IF I was to attempt to use RAID as an almost real-time solution, I would not use RAID in 5 or 10 BUT IF you must due to the other benefits than the obvious choice would be RAID 10.

At my home, I do in fact use a RAID to over-come single points of failure but I also have snap-shots of the hard drive being captured, this way - IF a moment of craziness was to occur with data loss, the RAID would be effected by my snap shot would not.

*Some thoughts to consider*

fixed.

Backups protect against corruption, deletion, and system failure....RAID does not.

RAID 5 or 10, as you recommend, only protects against drive failure.

#8 YounGMessiah

YounGMessiah

    "individual magnets"

  • Joined: 16-June 09
  • Location: Garden Of The Gods
  • OS: Windows 7 64-bit
  • Phone: Samsung Galaxy S3

Posted 23 May 2013 - 04:42

Just letting you know '!=' also means not equal to, same as your revision.

#9 sc302

sc302

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 33
  • Joined: 12-July 05
  • Location: NJ, USA

Posted 23 May 2013 - 05:42

Programmers.....

#10 YounGMessiah

YounGMessiah

    "individual magnets"

  • Joined: 16-June 09
  • Location: Garden Of The Gods
  • OS: Windows 7 64-bit
  • Phone: Samsung Galaxy S3

Posted 23 May 2013 - 05:53

:D

#11 OP goatsniffer

goatsniffer

    Supercalifragilisticexpialidosh

  • Joined: 11-January 04
  • Location: New York, USA

Posted 24 May 2013 - 04:36

Thanks for all the comments.

I do not view my RAID arrays as backups. Simply as safer storage. However, I do store backups to them, making them a second location for that particular data.

This server has been in the making since 2009. It started with a Core2 Duo and the 1TB WD Green drive I still have in the system. I've only become the digital hoarder that I am in the past few years, so the server has been upgraded according to my needs. Those are not external SATA enclosures, those are 5-in-3 case-mounted bays and they work great and look sexy while doing it. I would have opted for a server chassis with bays built in if having this much storage been the plan from the start.