BUILD Compatibility/build check (ASRock C236 WSI, Xeon E3-1240 v5)

[Beer]

Hey all, new here. Finally getting around to putting together a NAS build that I've been putting off for the last few years.

The build is primarily meant to function as a Plex/Media server to accommodate up to ~4 simultaneous 1080p transcodes with headroom to consider higher resolutions in the future. It will also serve as general home storage, a Teamspeak server, ownCloud.. and I have some other ideas I've not yet committed to.

I plan to start with 4x 4TB drives, and add more in a few months. Thinking about doing RAID6, but open to discussion.

Here's the build on pcpartpicker: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/Bq3fMp (ignore the ram, couldn't add the stuff I wanted)

Mobo: ASRock C236 WSI Mini-ITX server board (dual gigabit ethernet, 8x SATA3)
CPU: Xeon E3-1240 v5 Skylake
RAM: 32GB (2x 16GB) Crucial DDR4 2133 ECC UDIMM (Model: CT2K16G4WFD8213)
Case: Fractal Design Node 304 (6x bays)... possibly U-NAS NSC-800 (8x bays)
Drives: 4x 4TB HGST 0S03664 NAS drives (adding two more later)
PSU: Antec EarthWatts Green 380W (wattage is overkill, I know.. open to suggestions)


UNDECIDED:

• Boot drive... SSD or USB stick? I'm OK with spending another $50 on a small SSD if it benefits the system.
• Heatsink/fan... need to research size requirements more, considering the Mini-ITX case. Noise, however, is another major consideration.

A couple more things....

• I'm not dead set on a RAID configuration yet.. it's a toss up between RAID6 and RAID10 (EDIT: Correction... manual states only RAID 0,1,5,10 are supported..)
• Registered/Unbuffered/Buffered ECC RAM confuses the heck out of me. I think I chose compatible RAM, but I need some extra eyes to double check that. ASRock makes no distinction whatsoever, not on their website, not even in the motherboard manual. It just says "ECC/non-ECC".
• Regardless of the RAID mode I decide on.. is it easy to add 2 more drives later on?
• How well supported is Skylake in FreeNAS these days? I read about some issues.. but the threads I found were mostly from Nov/Dec 2015.

I mainly want a compatibility/part check.. but I am open to ANY suggestions offered, as this is my first build and I want to get everything right.

Thanks in advance!

 

[Dice]

Hello,
Welcome to the Forums.

CPU: Xeon E3-1240 v5 Skylake

There is no real benefit to put more cash into CPU than an E3-1230v5. Usually, the lowest 'full capacity model' within a CPU family is the best bet. If you'll be lacking in CPU power in the future, the 1240 won't make up the difference.

PSU: Antec EarthWatts Green 380W (wattage is overkill, I know.. open to suggestions)

This is definitely not overkill. Rather the opposite. In particular if you are interested in adding additional drives.
https://forums.freenas.org/index.php?threads/proper-power-supply-sizing-guidance.38811/

Boot drive... SSD or USB stick?

Get SSD. Increased reliability for rather cheap. Well worth it. Take the cash I saved you on the CPU and put it to a SSD.

I'm not dead set on a RAID configuration yet.. it's a toss up between RAID6 and RAID10 (EDIT: Correction... manual states only RAID 0,1,5,10 are supported..)

You've a lot of reading to do on FreeNAS. This statement indicates you really need to read the Newbie introduction by Cyberjock.
https://forums.freenas.org/index.ph...ning-vdev-zpool-zil-and-l2arc-for-noobs.7775/
You're doing alright on hardware, but the software part of things - you are lost at this point in time.

Regardless of the RAID mode I decide on.. is it easy to add 2 more drives later on?

Depends on your FreeNAS setup. This will be enlightened for you in the newbie guide.

How well supported is Skylake in FreeNAS these days?

No problems. As you noticed, older threads pre 9.10 contained some problems that have been sorted out in general. Still there are some gotchas to particular NICs (and 10Gbs), and some LSI onboard controllers (IIRC). I don't think any of that is of concern to you at this point.

Cheers /

 

[Ericloewe]

LSI onboard controllers (IIRC)

Well, they're mostly working now, with P9.
LSI is said to be about to release a fix for overenthusiastic dropping of drives behind interfaces that aren't quite good enough for SAS3, even if they're running at lower speeds, like SATA 6Gb/s.

 

[Beer]

There is no real benefit to put more cash into CPU than an E3-1230v5. Usually, the lowest 'full capacity model' within a CPU family is the best bet. If you'll be lacking in CPU power in the future, the 1240 won't make up the difference.

That works for me. I'm not being terribly picky about the CPU, I was just trying to choose one that would perform well and landed on the 1240, as it was near in performance to my desktop's 6700k on benchmarks. I'll take the $20 saved going with the 1230.

This is definitely not overkill. Rather the opposite. In particular if you are interested in adding additional drives.
https://forums.freenas.org/index.php?threads/proper-power-supply-sizing-guidance.38811/

Noted. However, I do not plan on increasing beyond 6 drives in the foreseeable future. If anything, I'll just replace the 4TBs with larger capacity disks. I've never been a massive data hoarder.. I'm very selective about what I keep.

Get SSD. Increased reliability for rather cheap. Well worth it. Take the cash I saved you on the CPU and put it to a SSD.

Noted.

You've a lot of reading to do on FreeNAS. This statement indicates you really need to read the Newbie introduction by Cyberjock.
https://forums.freenas.org/index.ph...ning-vdev-zpool-zil-and-l2arc-for-noobs.7775/
You're doing alright on hardware, but the software part of things - you are lost at this point in time.

Excellent read, thanks! I learned a lot about the relationships between vdevs/zpools/etc.. which I was previously unaware of. I am, however, finding some conflicting options on mirroring over Z parity. This article in particular suggests mirrored vdevs are the way to go. http://jrs-s.net/2015/02/06/zfs-you-should-use-mirror-vdevs-not-raidz/

Thoughts?

Depends on your FreeNAS setup. This will be enlightened for you in the newbie guide.

This part in particular caught my attention. It seems after reading the noob guide, that my original plan to start with 4 disks and upgrade to 6 might not be as feasible as I previously thought. It seems that once I create the original 4-disk vdev, that's it.. I would need to create an entirely separate vdev for the new disks.. and because RAIDZ requires 3+ disks, I can't do that either. I think this can be overcome by using mirrors instead of parity.. still reading stuff.

 

[Dice]

This article in particular suggests mirrored vdevs are the way to go. http://jrs-s.net/2015/02/06/zfs-you-should-use-mirror-vdevs-not-raidz/

Thoughts?

A very convincing majority of users on the forum uses Raidz2.

In my opinion, mirrors are worth considering in primarily two scenarios:
- when less than 6 drives.
- when requiring additional IOPS.

Raidz2 typically on 6-8 drives, maybe up to 10. Depends a lot on the ability to quickly replace drives how far you'd go.
Raidz3 9-11 drives. (Ie, mostly you'd be looking at 2x6drive raidz2 vdevs into a single pool instead - if there are not particular reasons for needing further redundancy, like for example machine located off site)

Or read this and get another grasp of things:
http://blog.delphix.com/matt/2014/06/06/zfs-stripe-width/

There are plenty of threads discussing or commenting on the mirror-blogpost. If you really want to dig into arguments, read around the forums further. I'll only offer you a taste.
Imagine, down the line when pool has expanded to include a couple, 3-4 vdevs of mirrors. Let's say for the sake of argument you buy 2 drives at a time, properly burning them in etc. At the occasion one drive dies, you'd really have to hustle AND pray there is no problem during the resilvering/reattachment of a replacement mirror drive. If you lose the 2nd drive (remember - they have likely suffered through very similar treatment), your pool is gone. Poof, gone. No recovery tools, no nothing.
When able to use raidz2, you're able to handle 2 drives failing at the same time (which could potentially come from the same batch). This would give significant piece of mind to replace ONE failed drive while retaining redundancy during the procedure. That's a luxury you wont have when aiming for the mirror strategy.

Cheers /