This is why I bought Server grade hardware so I don't have to perform X, Y, Z... extensive series of test.
What would make you think it doesn't need extensive testing?
Buying "server grade" hardware merely means that you have picked bits of hardware that are optimal for server use. "Server grade" hardware will, for example, typically have a high quality Ethernet chipset rather than a Realtek. "Server grade" hardware will lack superfluous hardware such as audio. "Server grade" hardware should have IPMI and should log ECC errors and in general have good servery properties.
That doesn't mean that there aren't manufacturing defects. "Server grade" hardware isn't magically 100% problem-free. "Server grade" hardware can come dead on arrival. A BIOS can get corrupted. A pin can get bent. A connector can be seated not-quite-right. A power supply can be marginal. A card might not be seated quite right. Or you might have assembled the whole darn thing in a non-ESD-safe environment and caused subtle damage. Even many "professional" shops don't take ESD seriously... while some of us have gone to some expense to set up ESD-safe shops. "Server grade" doesn't buy you hard drives that are 100% guaranteed to be reliable - and that's by far the biggest liability for a NAS.
The
guidance I've provided for burn-in suggests that a thousand hours of testing is a good starting point. However, it isn't uncommon to see a server here on the bench for months undergoing various stress testing. The time to discover problems is before you put the gear into production, if at all possible.
Even high quality equipment that have passed stringent quality test may exhibit undesirable behaviour. 100% reliability doesn't exist and even the stress you put on you hardware before putting them into production are not going to be tested 100%. It isn't possible.
"My car's seat belts cannot save me in 100% of accidents." Got it. Are you implying it's fine not to wear the seat belts?
Why not, obviously something is bothering you, and yet I don't understand what it is. I am not taking an offensive stand, I just try to understand the reasoning behind your judgement.
If you can't justify your remark what the point having this forum at all.
Let's go through what is wrong and undesirable, and maybe what is wrong to you isn't for me.
It's like driving a Formula 1 car on a 30 mph road, or turtle on a Greyhound race.
My point is, I bought my equipment based on many criteria I had in mind, the rest from pieces of information here and there through this forum, other forum, well not the entire web obviously, but made a sizeable effort to pick what I believe would make a good candidate, and of course based on my own experience.
This forum is all about helping people, and pointing out errors so that they can be remediated, if not for me it should serve ground for the next generation of noobs and more seasoned persons after me.
I'm going to thank you to not tell me what the purpose of this forum is. I believe I'm the second most active poster here, even if I've mostly been absent for the past half a year, and I believe I have several bits of key documentation to my credit that I've spent significant time and energy writing, maintaining, and updating. Those things aren't really for my benefit, they're for the benefit of everyone else. I think I've done a reasonable share of helping.
"maybe what is wrong to you isn't for me"? Seriously? Hey, fine. I'm not forcing you to read my posts or take my advice. It's not like I've been hanging out in the shop trying out lots of stuff over the years, debugging the problems, posting stickies. It's not like those of us who frequent the forum have some idea about what does and doesn't work. It's not like we haven't debated these issues many times, explained them even more. So since you imply I'm not helping, and since you seem like maybe you don't want to listen to the voice of experience, why you here, bro?
Same comments. Beside, what makes the E3-1241-V3 worse than the E5-2609? What base for comparison are you refering to?
The E5-2603 CPU you have in your originally described test system is
The Slowest Piece Of Crap Xeon E5. No hyperthreading. No turbo boost. 1.8GHz. An E3-1230 is nearly twice that fast, with hyperthreading, with turbo boost. Honestly. There's this great new resource called Intel ARK. Avail yourself of the resource.
Same about the crappy RAID controller? Beside not being on a PCIe daughter board it seems to have decent specification according to the tech brief, however and I agree, there is no detail specifications about the device itself, and under which condition it behaved, either in IR or IT mode. All I know is that it has 8 SATA 3 interfaces and has 8 PCIe 3.0 lanes to the processor. Which means that there is plenty of room to fully exercise SATA 3 links.
Some unhelpful jerkoff wrote
all about those LSI controllers in the hardware forum, especially touching upon your MFI-based RAID controller.
If Freenas is not build to perform such series of test, then what better platform would you recommend. If it was possible, then why not provide us with a set of scripts that we could all use, then we could all try to conform to a Freenas open-standard for testing.
Yes, I know it's very unfortunate that no one will summarize
how to build, burn in, and test your FreeNAS system. And quite frankly yeah it sucks that I have not volunteered even more time to write a set of scripts that you could all use, because I'm so frelling lazy that I prefer to run a lot of tests by hand and/or just whip up a few quick scripts specific to my needs. Writing a comprehensive test suite is a very different thing and past efforts to that end were disappointing, so I haven't bothered for at least a decade.
