How feasible is this set-up and back-up plan?

[oguruma]

Network: House is wired with Cat 6 through an unmanaged switch and PFsense router.

PCs: 3x Windows PCs and a macbook pro (only occassionally used). All of the PCs only have an SSD installed.

Hardware: Dell Poweredge with Xeon 1225 and 12GB non-ECC (I know, I know). 4TB MyCloud and 4TB Mybook External USB drive. Currently using as a Plex and Surveillance server. The surveillance server aspect will soon be replaced with an NVR.

I would like to build convert the Poweredge box (currently running Windows 7) into a Freenas Box set up as follows:
1x 4TB HDD Raid0: will be used for media (plex). I would like to limit my movies and music 4TB (shouldn't be hard for our family).
2x 1TB HDD RaidZ1: each PC will get a 100-200GB iSCSI target. The remainder will be set up in a share, which will be used for my work stuff, documents, and the kid's schoolwork. This will allow the kids to access their homework on any PC in the house.

Back-Up Strategy:

Music/Videos:
I would like to limit the media to a single HDD to save costs. I want to avoid a JBOD set-up. As a back-up I would like to do periodic back-ups via a Windows PC (robocopy?) to the MyBook for the media. The will give me a layer of redundancy without spinning another HDD 24/7.

Documents:
I would back up the important documents (medical records, receipts, etc.) to the MyCloud as well as a USB drive via a PC periodically. I currently rotate a USB drive every few months to my Safe Deposit Box, so if the house burns down, I still have a copy of receipts and all that jazz. I want to use the MyCloud in particular because it has Apps for the iPhones and iPads.

Photos:
Photos I care about would burned to DVD+R and saved to the MyCloud.

How does this sound? Is a weekly RoboCopy from Freenas to External HDDs a possible solution?

Is RaidZ1 workable with iSCSI targets on the drive?

Also, I currently Freenas 9.3 in a virtual box just to play around with it, but I can't figure out the recycling bin. As I understand it, Freenas has a network recycling bin feature. Does anybody know of any guides or walkthroughs that cover this?

 

[Robert Trevellyan]

2x 1TB HDD RaidZ1: each PC will get a 100-200GB iSCSI target.

With two drives you'll be working with a ZFS mirror, not RAIDZ1.
Any reason you prefer iSCSI over CIFS shares?

How does this sound? Is a weekly RoboCopy from Freenas to External HDDs a possible solution?

Sounds workable.

Is RaidZ1 workable with iSCSI targets on the drive?

ZFS mirror(s), which is what you'll have with 2 drives, is the right configuration for block storage.

I can't figure out the recycling bin

There is a checkbox labelled "Export Recycle Bin" in the CIFS share settings. I haven't tried using it.

 

[oguruma]

Thanks for the input. I wanted to give each PC an iSCSI drive mainly because so deleted items go the local recycling bin (I don't care about this, but it makes it easier for the kids), and because photos write faster to iSCSI than CIFS at least that is my understanding. My only experience with an iSCSI drive is what I have been playing with in my virtualbox freenas.

 

[Robert Trevellyan]

I wanted to give each PC an iSCSI drive mainly because so deleted items go the local recycling bin

Are you sure that's how it works? I always assume recycle bins are per drive. Otherwise trashing a file would require the OS to move it between drives.

 

[oguruma]

I'm positive that is how it works. That is how it works on the Seagate NAS I use at work, and I even set up iSCSI on a freenas virtualbox just to get accustomed to setting it up, and it works the same way.

 

[pirateghost]

or you could just set up CIFS/SMB shares properly and have it send things to its own recycle bin, or use snapshots and 'windows previous versions' of files. iSCSI is a horrible way to go for this IMO

 

[Fuganater]

What PERC card is in that box? You may run into issues trying to get it to work with FreeNAS.

 

[oguruma]

or you could just set up CIFS/SMB shares properly and have it send things to its own recycle bin, or use snapshots and 'windows previous versions' of files. iSCSI is a horrible way to go for this IMO

What's wrong with iSCSI? I liked the idea of using it since the kids have only been using computers for the last 6 months or so (5 and 6 years old), and the idea of the iSCSI drive functioning the same as a local drive appealed to me. I do some photography with a 36MP camera and from what I have heard, files tend to transfer a wee bit faster using iSCSI.

 

[pirateghost]

What's wrong with iSCSI? I liked the idea of using it since the kids have only been using computers for the last 6 months or so (5 and 6 years old), and the idea of the iSCSI drive functioning the same as a local drive appealed to me. I do some photography with a 36MP camera and from what I have heard, files tend to transfer a wee bit faster using iSCSI.

iSCSI isn't a sharing protocol. You can only have one computer connected to it.

 

[oguruma]

iSCSI isn't a sharing protocol. You can only have one computer connected to it.

right, but can't you create more than one iSCSI target? I was planning on creating an iSCSI target for each computer....

 

[pirateghost]

right, but can't you create more than one iSCSI target? I was planning on creating an iSCSI target for each computer....

Sure. You can do that. Management will become a nightmare at some point though.

You also require more resources for iSCSI.

Overall, I don't see this as a better solution to creating shares over SMB.

 

[cyberjock]

I have to agree with the others. Going iSCSI is not something I'd recommend for this. It's slower, more problems are likely to occur, etc.

I use CIFS shares. A script mounts them when I login so they are always "just there". They perform MUCH MUCH better than iSCSI ever will. If you want recycle bin features that's what the export recycle bin feature is for (and it works great). You can also do the snapshot revisioning as a second option / alternative. iSCSI seems to be really inappropriate for this aside from it looking like a local drive.

 

[oguruma]

I appreciate the input from everybody. I have successfully been persuaded to use SMB instead of iSCSI.