New file/media storage server.

[JGO95]

Hello everyone. It's my first time posting here. I'm currently in the process of building a home server mainly to be used for file storage and media consumption with plex (other cases might arise in the future). I will mostly be storing movies, videos, Audio CDs, and photos along with the usual computer backups, etc. After reading the recommended hardware specs and countless threads in the forum I arrived at the following build.

CPU: Intel Xeon E3-1230v4
Motherboard: Supermicro X11SSH-F
Ram: 2x Samsung M391A2K43BB1-CPB DDR4-2133 16GB Module
PSU: Corsair HX1000i 80+ Plat
Case: X-Case RM424 Pro 24 Bay Hotswap Storage Server Case
HBA: 2x LSI 9211-8i 6Gb/s

First a couple of disclaimers:
1. I know the PSU is overkill but I got it at a very good price (less than what a Hw750i would cost). If this still turns out to be EXTREMELY overkill, I might consider selling it and buying a slightly less power hungry one.
2. I would prefer a SuperMicro case, but I'm from Europe and I can't seem to find an affordable one that would ship to where I live. I have been looking at Ebay for the past 2 months but found nothing. Besides, most of the ones that DO ship here have the SAS 1 backplane (which only allows up to 2TB drives). So that's a no go. A week ago I found out about theses cases. There is not much information about them but they seem to have evolved from a Norco 4224 copy to a slight different one. If somebody has any feedback about them, I'll be happy to hear it.

First I intend to run an M.2 SSD for my boot drive (still unsure what model).

Now my only question is what drive setup do I choose. I'm aiming at a minimum of 40~45 TB of usable storage (already accounting for the 80% utilization). I'm currently looking at two options:
1. 24x 4TB WD RED (3x 8-disc RaidZ2 Vdevs)
2. 16x 6TB WD RED (2x 8-disc RaidZ2 Vdevs)

The first setup is a little cheaper (less ~250€) but I think the second one has some advantages. First, it has fewer drives which would allow for easier future expansion (let's say in 4 years I can add another Vdev of 8TB drives). Also because it has a fewer drive count I expect it to generate less heat (am I off mark here?) which should result in better temps since the case might not be amazing in that aspect (there's not much information on it). Do you agree with these points or should I just take the cheaper option?

Also, another question is whether adding another 2 drives to the second setup and doing 6-drive Vdevs (the "optimal" size) would result in any meaningful improvement. I would be adding 2 parity drives (and increasing the cost) but I don't think I would take much out of it. All the information I've found on this is pretty two-sided. It seems that from 3~4 years ago to now, the general consensus of the forum has shifted from "always use the optimal number of drives" to the current "optimal is optimal but for home use, 8-disc RaidZ2 is perfectly acceptable". That's why I'm asking. This could also be applied in setup 1, using 4x 6-disc RAIDZ2 Vdevs instead.

Thanks in advance for any help provided.

EDIT: Fixed a typo. I meant "8-disc RAIDZ2 is acceptable".

 

[Dice]

I agree with all of your reasoning with one exception.

to the current "optimal is optimal but for home use, 8-disc RaidZ is perfectly acceptable

I hope this is a typo for raidz2.

There are some different ideas on how wide the you can/should go on Raidz2 and Raidz3. However, the oldish "n+1" arguments have been downplayed the last year or so.
There is a link in my signature on raidz2 width from a top ZFS developer. It gives an idea on how to properly selected width in relation to needs.

My own preferences takes drive size into account, and some sort of future upgradability.

That is, to me, I can see the bullet proof appeal of running a 6x4tb raidz2 as a solution to the specified problem "newbie needs a solid foundation".
On the extremes - I'd not go past 10 drives in a raidz2. Absolute max 10 drives, sized 5TB. Some would already object to that, calling for a raidz3 solution.
The thing is - the wider you go, the steeper the upgrade cost is ahead. I'm at 7drive wide right now. I wish I had stayed at 6 drives, since the cost of adding another 7drive vdev is cracking my <comfort zone on spending>.


I try to not think of the drives as lost to redundancy, but rather as included in the price for storage when using FreeNAS.
Ie, (now I don't show the calculation) - comparing the 6TB drives, for actual 6TB in FreeNAS in a 7xdrive raidz2, you'd multiply the wanted availible space (80% conservative safety rule included) by 1.82.
Or, conversely - multiply the bought sticker capacity by 0.54 to se what's left in FreeNAS.
(23TB usable from 42TB bought) (bidule0hms calculator vs sticker)

So that said, the point I'm trying to make is that number of lost drives to redundancy should not be the primary number in comparisons, even though it is obviously intertwined. Instead, I suggest that looking at how much space you want to get, and then just feed FreeNAS enough drives to get there. If you cannot afford it straight away, then select a vdev width that makes for a "possible upgrade path".

Hope there was some sense made x)

Cheers

 

[JGO95]

Thank you for your answer.

I agree with all of your reasoning with one exception.


I hope this is a typo for raidz2.

Yes, you are right. I meant that a 8-disc RAIDZ2 Vdev was acceptable. Fixed the original post.