Storage setup for small home build

[Magnus_]

Hi, so I have installed freenas and learned allot. I have read the manual and I feel I now have som basic understanding of the system.

I am about to redo the install after learning from my first install. And this leads to a question that I can't figure out.

**I would like to have the OS on a smal SSD. (this because I cant get my 7 year old motherboard to boot on USB)
**And a main storage pool whit a mirror 2*3TB
**And one more SSD containing Jails and SLOG. (Here is where my question lays)

Want this setup because of the following.

1. fast plex indexing
2. Syslog outside of the main pool so they can go to sleep and me quiet not in use. (probably 90% of the time frenas will not be used)

I understad in big systems whit heavy load this setup is not optimal. You want a fast SLOG being on its on SSD, you want a mirrored SSD and so on and forth. But would not this setup be a good middle ground for a home user like me if you think of the general pros and cons?

 

[MatthewSteinhoff]

Add RAM first. That's the key to speed. It's only when you have maxed-out system RAM that you should start looking elsewhere for performance improvements.

You'll need to provide more detailed specifications for any additional help.

Cheers,
Matt

 

[Magnus_]

I have 8GB RAM, Intel motherboard core 2 duo running on 2,77GHz. And the speed is good enough as it is. It's really the constant (and pointless) sleep/no sleep noise and ware from the drives I don't want. The (possible) plex speedup is more like a presumed bonus.

And want to know if this setup have any big downsides before I execute. Or maybe it's not even possible to do this.

 

[MatthewSteinhoff]

1. Intel doesn't show a Duo running at 2.77 mHz. Are you sure that's the processor you're using?

2. Assuming a relatively fast Core 2 Duo, you're at the edge of what Plex requires to transcode media.

3. FreeNAS requires 8GB RAM but would like more. Plex looks to need 2GB of RAM so already you have too little RAM.

4. I'm pretty sure that you don't have ECC RAM which is highly recommended for FreeNAS.

Overall, I wouldn't recommend using FreeNAS on this platform. You'd be better off just leaving it Windows and running Plex from there. Less complexity and lower system requirements.

Cheers,
Matt

 

[Magnus_]

You are right it is E6750 @ 2.66GHz

Okay, you are probably right. FreeNAS is something more suited fore larger solutions and not really ment for home users. This is something I think very few people realize when getting in to this.

But it feels more exciting then just running a boring MS OS. Or buying a Synology for €250 or so. (this is what someone like me are comparing this to so the bar are sett rather low)

I will try this out more before I say to much. But from what I have discovered so far a system like mine seems to work just fine for most home use. And all this about memory for small systems seems to be a bit exaggerated. The reason for this I think is professionals setting the standard and they have a completely different approach and view altogether. They don't chose between FreeNAS and a home NAS for €250.

But I have spent nothing on this so I have noting to lose. I will try install the way I described, test it out for a while and then I will report back.

 

[MatthewSteinhoff]

E6750 @ 2.66GHz

The E6750 has a Passmark score of 1725. It doesn't look as though Plex will be able to effectively transcode with that processor.

Cheers,
Matt

 

[JustinClift]

@Magnus_ If you're ok with building a system yourself from pieces on Ebay, you can probably put a decent entry level system together cheaply. eg:

* Motherboard: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/152338156828
* CPU: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/192074836061
* Not sure about suitable CPU coolers, maybe these? http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/151663878211
* RAM I'm not sure about. Possibly this: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/171906477356
* Power supply and case... lots of choices. :)

 

[MatthewSteinhoff]

They don't chose between FreeNAS and a home NAS for €250.

As an aside, I'm fairly knowledgeable when it comes to FreeNAS. I have two in production at my company and have deployed four or five others as a consultant. I've got enough spare parts to put together a pretty nice FreeNAS system for my house.

What do I have at home? A Drobo 5N. Why? It's small, fuel efficient, relatively inexpensive, reliable, quiet, wife-approved, runs cool and performs well enough. Why does my company still deploy Drobos in remote offices instead of FreeNAS? It's small, fuel efficient, relatively inexpensive, reliable, quiet, runs cool and performs well enough.

If you want to use those parts with FreeNAS, @Magnus_, you won't hurt my feelings. They might perform just fine for your intended purpose. You think FreeNAS is exciting now? Just wait until you're trying to salvage your data later. It'll be a roller-coaster ride!

In any case, best of luck.

Cheers,
Matt

 

[Magnus_]

I appreciate all the input. I do have to say I am surprised based on having read this http://doc.freenas.org/9.10/network.html. FreeNAS is not for normal home use what so ever. I mean who puts 16GB RAM home NAS (extremely few people) 98% probably don't have that in any computer they own.

I understand different operating systems are intended for different things. And I am sure FreeNAS is good at something. But efficiency does not seem to be one of them.

One thing I was certain FreeNAS was superior at was securing data on the discs. But if I interpret this correct
"Just wait until you're trying to salvage your data later. It'll be a roller-coaster ride!" it wont even do that very well with components home user probably will use.

 

[wblock]

Technology has changed quickly enough that 16G of RAM is really cheap today. Yes, it might be a lot compared to what is in your current desktop, but as far as hardware goes, it's cheap. To put it another way, don't compare the needs of FreeNAS to the underpowered laptops that are so common. Compare it to the expensive data recovery cost for the family that has all their irreplaceable baby photos on a failed flash drive or a portable hard drive that has crashed. I've had people come to me with that sort of situation, and it's not pretty.

The warnings here about minimum requirements can be pretty dire. But those warnings tend to come from people who know from hard experience. Some people run FreeNAS with less, and get away with it. But some have problems, and then tend to blame FreeNAS rather than the hardware.

 

[MatthewSteinhoff]

FreeNAS is designed for data security, @Magnus_. It does that exquisitely when run on the recommended hardware. Where people run into problems is when they stray from the recommended hardware.

The people who are most excited by FreeNAS as those who have experience with enterprise-level NAS equipment. I've purchased Dell-branded EMC, NetApp and IBM NAS hardware in my career. It always felt way over priced when you looked at the underlying hardware cost. But there was no real alternative.

FreeNAS is now that alternative. For $5,000 in FreeNAS hardware, I can get security, space and performance that I would have had to pay $45,000 not even seven years ago. Heck, NetApp still charges $18,000 for a system not that different than a $5,000 FreeNAS system.

Where you do see major differences is between a $400 FreeNAS system and an $800 FreeNAS system.

At $400 plus some random, reused parts, you don't have ECC RAM, are using a crappy NIC and are RAM-starved. It might work. It might not work. Quite often, it looks like it is working right up until something gets corrupted and you lose the entire data set.

At $600-$800, you have the right (and a healthy amount of) RAM, the right NIC, a case that ventilates well, room for disk space expansion, enough processing power to add a third Plex stream and peace of mind that your data will stay safe.

For many people, it's worth spending, effectively, double. That's their family photos. That's their company's tax returns. That's their entire music collection they personally ripped with the iPhone 3 came out. That's stuff they can't afford to lose.

On the other hand, a lot of people are just looking for FreeNAS to store their massive torrented movie collection and the data isn't worth double because they got it for free.

Maybe, in addition to requiring folks to post their hardware details, the moderators could insist also assign a value to the data being stored. That could better help the rest of us factor that into our suggested solutions.

Cheers,
Matt

 

[Magnus_]

Thanks for your time. I fell I have learned allot. This hole thing actually started from an article written somewhere about making a NAS out of your old computer. It sounded fun and nice to make use of components I hade no use for anymore. And in my mind a NAS could not possibly be needing good hardware (except disk) right..... wrong... FreeNAS seemed to be the most popular, but for reason I did not understand until now. It's a bit uncommon for freeware to be developed for mainly professional use. Professionals tends to stay away from that for good reason.

FreeNAS is good because of ZFS. And ZFS is not made for small home users. It sounds great when you first read it, but its really not. For big storage on good hardware being able to grow limitless its probably pretty great.

Well anyway. If I don't buy new hardware I think windows 10 is the best way to goo. It seems to have a pretty good built in storage solution more suited for my needs. Since my old hardware have better specs then a home NAS for €500 it seems stupid to spend that money.

 

[Glorious1]

FreeNAS is not for normal home use what so ever.

Lots of people, including me, use FreeNAS as a home server. But you can't just throw it into whatever old hardware you have laying around. A lot of the experienced forum members won't even give you the time of day unless your hardware meets the recommended specifications.

 

[maglin]

For most people running Windows and using it to server media would work for what they want. But it's not a NAS so connectivity to it is troublesome and it's not data safe like ZFS but it will do what they are wanting usually with there current hardware.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SweetAndLow]

Thanks for your time. I fell I have learned allot. This hole thing actually started from an article written somewhere about making a NAS out of your old computer. It sounded fun and nice to make use of components I hade no use for anymore. And in my mind a NAS could not possibly be needing good hardware (except disk) right..... wrong... FreeNAS seemed to be the most popular, but for reason I did not understand until now. It's a bit uncommon for freeware to be developed for mainly professional use. Professionals tends to stay away from that for good reason.

FreeNAS is good because of ZFS. And ZFS is not made for small home users. It sounds great when you first read it, but its really not. For big storage on good hardware being able to grow limitless its probably pretty great.

Well anyway. If I don't buy new hardware I think windows 10 is the best way to goo. It seems to have a pretty good built in storage solution more suited for my needs. Since my old hardware have better specs then a home NAS for €500 it seems stupid to spend that money.

FreeNAS is perfect for home use. I think your experience with computer hardware is just a little different. Memory is super cheap now and most build around here have min 32GB these days. Even most gaming PC will have 32GB now. FreeNAS is not good for reusing hardware unless that is older server components.

I think the cheapest FreeNAS build is about $400. It meets all the specs and will keep your data nice and safe.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

 

[Magnus_]

I think we are both right. I have now installed W10 instead. It works good. And support for applications and features are limitless. I have it set up using a mirror for data and SSD for OS. It feel much faster the FreeNAS, even file transfers over NIC are much faster. So for me that solution is better. I also think (this is speculation) the chance of recover my data in case of critical error would be bigger in W10 then FreeNAS. ZFS is most likely better for professionals that know exactly what they are doing and how to set it up correctly. But the limitation of applications an features for home users would still be in W10's favor.

But my whole point here is that since the FreeNAS manual say that 8Gb RAM is enough, then everyone with no experience will assume that an OS like FreeNAS that's specifically made for being a NAS is better than W10. But I think its safe to say it's clearly not.

 

[wblock]

But my whole point here is that since the FreeNAS manual say that 8Gb RAM is enough, then everyone with no experience will assume that an OS like FreeNAS that's specifically made for being a NAS is better than W10. But I think its safe to say it's clearly not.

Sorry, I do not understand what you are saying here. The FreeNAS manual says "The recommended minimum is 8 GB of RAM.".

Otherwise, the two systems are totally different. FreeNAS is a ZFS-based NAS. Windows is a desktop operating system that can act as a fileserver, but it does not have ZFS or the data protection that provides. It might seem to do the same thing on the surface, but underneath, they have very different architectures and goals.

 

[Magnus_]

But according to what people are telling me in this thread, the data is not safe using 8GB RAM. So I think my reasoning is perfectly at point. True, totally different systems but to me they accomplish the same, and windows do it better.

I don't think the manual is wrong, but I would call it misleading.

 

[SweetAndLow]

But according to what people are telling me in this thread, the data is not safe using 8GB RAM. So I think my reasoning is perfectly at point. True, totally different systems but to me they accomplish the same, and windows do it better.

I don't think the manual is wrong, but I would call it misleading.

I don't think anyone said 8gb was not safe.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

 

[Magnus_]

I don't think anyone said 8gb was not safe.

If you read it, people are seriously upset (which is at bit weird I honestly have to say) about installing on that hardware. And it can't be because of performance, because that was just fine on my first install on that hardware. So I assume it was dataloss concerns. After all thats the hole point of a NAS, ceeping your data safe.