My proposed Build ( Suggestion / Feedback Needed)

[Avngl]

Hey guys,

 

So I plan on seperating the HDDS from my HTPC and have a dedicated UNRAID box.

 

Below is my proposed build:

 

Case: 4U rack mount server case with gate door D416N

Cpu: Intel Core i3-3220

Mobo: GIGABYTE GA-Z77M-D3H-MVP

Memory: Kingston 4GB DDR3 1600 KVR16N11/4

PSU: SILVERSTONE Strider Gold Evolution SST-ST75F-G 750W

Flash Drive: SanDisk Cruzer Fit 4GB USB 2.0 Flash Drive

 

What I have:

 

1 x SAMSUNG Spinpoint F3 HD103SJ 7200RPM 1TB 

1 x Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 ST31000340AS 7200 RPM 1TB

1 x Western Digital WD Black WD1002FAEX 7200 RPM 1TB

3 x  Western Digital WD Green WD30EZRX 3TB  (Recently Purchased, UNUSED)

 

What I plan to do:

 

1) To keep my system future proof. I was told that the casing would hold up to 10 Hard Disk Drives, but expandable to 15 drives. My storage needs will definitely increase, however, 15 would be enough where I could simply swap out a 3TB drive and replace it with a 7TB drive in the future.

2) One of the 3TB drives would serve as a parity.

3) XBMC with mysql will be running on this build so that I could access my media from any device / location at home without having to update multiple devices.

 

My Questions:

 

1) Is the PSU overkill? I am leaning towards the idea that I might not need to change the PSU if I were to add up to 10 drives in the near future (ALL Green)

2) Should i opt for a different build? My requirements is something along the total cost of this proposed build and something that is not power-hungry

3) Would I need a cache drive for this requirements? I hope not

 

P/s: I am from Malaysia and these parts would be bought from Malaysia except for the casing which will be imported from China.

 

Your feedback would be most helpful as I am still in the stage of discovery.

 

[Frank1940]

The PSU is overkill only form the standpoint of price.  However, I don't what your electrical costs per KWH so it may prove to be a bargain if it can save on electric costs.

 

With regard to the cache drive, I would increase the RAM to 8GB and which would allow unRAID to cache writes any unused memory.  Unless you really intend doing a massive amount of large file uploads (after the initial loading of your present data onto your new server), you will probably never  be aware of the actual write speed. 

 

Should the write speed become a real issue for you, then add the cache drive.

[TODDLT]

I use this PSU

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139010

 

I think it is pretty much the same specs, has great reviews, and is a little better deal.  If you are planning on 15 drives, I would go with one this size.  Whether the high efficiency pays for itself, hard to say.  I can tell you the Corsair is whisper quiet and worth it from that standpoint alone for me.  I have 12 drives in my array and this was recommended to me by others here. 

 

There are lots of views on the benefit of a cache drive.  I started with one and ended up just adding it to the array.  If you write large files to the array daily than maybe so.  For me, I am just adding movies every couple weeks so it taking a few extra minutes on the write is really insignificant  in the big picture.  The files I write on a daily basis are much smaller so it doesn't matter.  remember anything on the cache drive is not parity protected till moved later.

 

If you are concerned about write speed and don't use a cache drive, then get a faster 7200 RPM drive for parity.  It does make a difference.  I use the seagate and have been happy with it.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148844

My write speeds vary form 28-35 MB/Sec (usually 32/33).  I don't think it's possible to get above the mid 30's with parity.  I think I was getting in the 70's to 80's with a 7200 RPM cache drive, but I lost a slot in my case and it just wasn't important enough for my use.

 

You could build the array, hold back one of your smaller drives, use it for a while without cache, then put a cache drive in, and see if you think it's worth the difference.

 

The 7200RPM parity drive will burn a little more power in a write operation, but I would think total power use would still be less than writing to a cache drive, and then cranking up 3 drives later to move it again.

[seanant]

If your going to use Seagate drives, personally I would go with the constellation models. Not the SED model. Just the bare sas or sata model.

 

I had 6 failed barracuda drives. I'll never use them again. There more cash but much better drives that are designed for a NAS.

[Avngl]

The PSU is overkill only form the standpoint of price.  However, I don't what your electrical costs per KWH so it may prove to be a bargain if it can save on electric costs.

 

With regard to the cache drive, I would increase the RAM to 8GB and which would allow unRAID to cache writes any unused memory.  Unless you really intend doing a massive amount of large file uploads (after the initial loading of your present data onto your new server), you will probably never  be aware of the actual write speed. 

 

Should the write speed become a real issue for you, then add the cache drive.

 

I am not too sure on the electrical cost per KWH as it is based on the amount of electricity that we use per month. In a 5 people family home, we pay about RM200 per month or USD60 where the air conditioner is sometimes turned on in 2 - 3 rooms.

 

I use this PSU

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139010

 

I think it is pretty much the same specs, has great reviews, and is a little better deal.  If you are planning on 15 drives, I would go with one this size.  Whether the high efficiency pays for itself, hard to say.  I can tell you the Corsair is whisper quiet and worth it from that standpoint alone for me.  I have 12 drives in my array and this was recommended to me by others here. 

 

There are lots of views on the benefit of a cache drive.  I started with one and ended up just adding it to the array.  If you write large files to the array daily than maybe so.  For me, I am just adding movies every couple weeks so it taking a few extra minutes on the write is really insignificant  in the big picture.  The files I write on a daily basis are much smaller so it doesn't matter.  remember anything on the cache drive is not parity protected till moved later.

 

If you are concerned about write speed and don't use a cache drive, then get a faster 7200 RPM drive for parity.  It does make a difference.  I use the seagate and have been happy with it.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148844

My write speeds vary form 28-35 MB/Sec (usually 32/33).  I don't think it's possible to get above the mid 30's with parity.  I think I was getting in the 70's to 80's with a 7200 RPM cache drive, but I lost a slot in my case and it just wasn't important enough for my use.

 

You could build the array, hold back one of your smaller drives, use it for a while without cache, then put a cache drive in, and see if you think it's worth the difference.

 

The 7200RPM parity drive will burn a little more power in a write operation, but I would think total power use would still be less than writing to a cache drive, and then cranking up 3 drives later to move it again.

 

I am using a corsair gs700 psu for my desktop and yes it is very good. It is silent and performs without much fuss. I trust the brand Corsair, having my SSD drive from them as well. I will go with the PSU that you've recomended.

 

Efficiency is not a big concern at the moment as the server would be turned on from Thursdays to Sundays. It might run full time during November - December but once college starts, it would usually run over the weekend depending on my classes as I would be a state away from home.

 

My usage would be the same as yours, adding movies / tv shows to the array every now and then and it wouldn't be that frequent therefore the cache drive would be unnessary. I would be able to wait a few minutes extra while my files get copied over.

 

So from your suggestion, it's better that I get a 7200RPM drive to be assigned as a parity drive right? I am considering the ST3000DM001 model as you have suggested. Thank you very much.

 

If your going to use Seagate drives, personally I would go with the constellation models. Not the SED model. Just the bare sas or sata model.

 

I had 6 failed barracuda drives. I'll never use them again. There more cash but much better drives that are designed for a NAS.

 

I see. There are no constellation model available for 3TB so my choice is rather limited. Please correct me if i am wrong.

 

 

By the way guys, I have a few more questions

 

1) Is it possible that the server to be turned on over the weekend every time or would it be better to leave it running 24/7 (Any risk of degradation / data loss / corruption)

 

2) I have some data in all 3 of my 1TB drives. Will the data be gone once I add them to the array?

 

 

[Frank1940]

I would personally shut it down if it will be completely unused for five straight days.  This is particularly true since you don't have a UPS  listed.  (If you check the forum, you will find many threads from people with problems after a unprotected power failure!)  It only takes  a couple of minutes to reboot when you return home. 

 

The data presently on the drives will be gone.  Develop a plan to copy the data off temporarily, then add the drive to the array and copy the data back.  (I did this with 2TB of data when I set up my unRAID server.)