Recommend me a NAS/Backup Server setup

MannishBoy wrote:
Rezzy wrote:

How much are WHS licenses?

$50 :)

Tempting, but OEM. I'm not tied to this motherboard so that's a no-go for now.
Since the suggested solution to my user-creation issue involved script hacking and potential reinstall of the entire system I've said f*ck it and downloaded Ubuntu Server 11.04. If I'm going to be digging into code anyway I may as well get a full system out of it. Also mediatomb sounds interesting.
Currently installing.

Rezzy wrote:
MannishBoy wrote:
Rezzy wrote:

How much are WHS licenses?

$50 :)

Tempting, but OEM. I'm not tied to this motherboard so that's a no-go for now.
Since the suggested solution to my user-creation issue involved script hacking and potential reinstall of the entire system I've said f*ck it and downloaded Ubuntu Server 11.04. If I'm going to be digging into code anyway I may as well get a full system out of it. Also mediatomb sounds interesting.
Currently installing.

You might look at the whs site. The used to let you download a version for trial. That was awhile back with the previous version.

The Ubuntu + Samba solution is working pretty smoothly.
Did hit a snag when it came time to partition and format the new drives. Apparently FreeNAS switched them over to a newish partition table system, which causes issues when you try to populate them with a filesystem using a program expecting MBR. The programs detect that it's this new partition type and immediately try to recover it instead of formatting. I didn't get past that until I downloaded and repartitioned with gdisk (apparently written by the guy that came up with this new partition scheme).
For now I've got 2x2TB disks in RAID 0, mounted to a Samba share with anonymous access.

That's GPT partitioning, which is used by all operating systems for new/big drives. It's a pain in the ass, but get used to it, because it's not going away. It's part of the EFI standard, so blame Intel, not the guy who wrote gdisk. It can work with regular BIOS systems, but it's hard to boot from -- there's a 'shadow' MBR partition scheme on the drive so that old software can find its way around, but it's not supposed to be modified.

Once everything is switched over, GPT won't cause any inherent pain. It works fine, but it'll be awkward for a few years yet.

If you're going to use FreeNAS you should investigate ZFS. You don't need to use RAID if you're using ZFS, it's all done in software and it protects against errors creeping into your data, it's pretty damn efficient but it is more complicated to configure and use than just plain RAID.

So I'm considering building a Home NAS for use as a more robust backup solution and to act as a media server for a Jailbroken Apple TV.

I don't want to use WHS 2011 as I have Linux & iOS devices that don't play well with WHS - not to mention the problems with how WHS 2011 no longer aggregates storage.

I had almost made up my mind to go with FreeNAS, but discovered just a while back that FreeNAS 8 does not have any media server support (that's listed for 8.1) and FreeNAS 7 no longer works with newer versions of iTunes. I've looked at Amahi and unRAID and of the two I'd prefer unRAID since it doesn't try to dumb down everything like Amahi does, but the cost and hardware-lock licensing makes me pause.

So what does GWJ recommend as an OS with good NAS & Media server support?

Did you consider Amahi? I'm strongly considering this as an alternative to FreeNAS. It runs on top of a Fedora (or Red Hat?) installation, but there is also an alpha for Ubuntu.

Eezy_Bordone wrote:

For an open source version of the 'original' Windows Home Server there is Amahi.

Anyone have any experience w/ Synology NAS units? I bought their base home model, a 2tb drive, and an external dock for a SATA drive today. I've been planning on something like this for a while, but dithered until I had some extra cash.

My plan is to use the nas to back up local machines and act as a media server. It also allows streaming my music as internet radio and has ios/android apps as well. I'll back up the nas to a local drive and keep a copy of the backup in my office drawer. If it all works as planned, I think I'll be able to drop AWS/Jungledisk as my backup/webstorage option and save myself the monthly fee.

According to this review, the Synology NAS uses the ext2 file system. So if there's ever a problem, you should be able to take the drive out and recover it from any machine running Linux as long as it doesn't do anything weird to your data.

I wonder why they chose ext2 instead of ext3 though.

Also, the tech specs are strange, they suggest that the unit is only compatible with two hard drives, but I'm sure that's not the case.

Also here's an odd quirk of the system:

Multiple computers can simultaneously access the server, however it cannot access the same folder simultaneously. Meaning that Computer A and Computer B can be logged into Account A and be using Folder A and Folder B (one computer each), but it will not actively share folders between two or more computers at the same time. Meaning that Computer A and Computer B cannot be accessing the Folder A at the same time.

Still loving the heck out of my unRaid install, FWIW. Now at 7TB, 12 drives and counting.

I'm looking into an easier way to keep some stuff backed up. To those with experience with the Drobo hardware, is there a big reason to go with the Drobo FS (5 Drives) vs the older Drobo with only four drives other than the extra storage? It's a fraction of the price and seems to accomplish the same thing and I don't actually need tons of storage. I can't even fill one 3TB drive right now. Throwing four in one of those things will be more than enough to keep me going for ages.

Thin_J wrote:

I'm looking into an easier way to keep some stuff backed up. To those with experience with the Drobo hardware, is there a big reason to go with the Drobo FS (5 Drives) vs the older Drobo with only four drives other than the extra storage? It's a fraction of the price and seems to accomplish the same thing and I don't actually need tons of storage. I can't even fill one 3TB drive right now. Throwing four in one of those things will be more than enough to keep me going for ages.

Isn't the FS model their NAS? The S model connects directly to a computer, while the FS model lives on the network. If you don't need network storage and just want to connect to a single PC, the S looks great. If you require access from multiple machines, want to stream media, or need other server-y services, the FS can do that.

There is a nice chart at the bottom of this amazon page that details their offerings.

Oso wrote:

Anyone have any experience w/ Synology NAS units? I bought their base home model, a 2tb drive, and an external dock for a SATA drive today. I've been planning on something like this for a while, but dithered until I had some extra cash.

My plan is to use the nas to back up local machines and act as a media server. It also allows streaming my music as internet radio and has ios/android apps as well. I'll back up the nas to a local drive and keep a copy of the backup in my office drawer. If it all works as planned, I think I'll be able to drop AWS/Jungledisk as my backup/webstorage option and save myself the monthly fee.

I've had a Synology unit , a 207, it's been working well for over 3 years now. I'm doing pretty much what you describe. I still use jungledisk for offsite backup of photos, though.

So if I put a bunch of video files on the Drobo S I can't just point PS3 Media Server to it and stream over the network from it through the PC it's connected to? I have to have the FS (and another $400) for that?

That works too, but the price premium for the S is because of the eSATA/FW800/USB3.0 interfaces. It also requires your host machine to be on whenever you want to stream from the Drobo as well, so there's that.

I'm honestly thinking about selling off my Drobo S and picking up an FS or a similar NAS just because it seems to make more sense for my own setup.

Minarchist wrote:

Still loving the heck out of my unRaid install, FWIW. Now at 7TB, 12 drives and counting. :-)

unRaid looks interesting. So you trade speed for data reliability basically?

jollyeskimo wrote:

That works too, but the price premium for the S is because of the eSATA/FW800/USB3.0 interfaces. It also requires your host machine to be on whenever you want to stream from the Drobo as well, so there's that.

I'm honestly thinking about selling off my Drobo S and picking up an FS or a similar NAS just because it seems to make more sense for my own setup.

My machine's always on anyway when I'm home. Cool that it'll work fine that way though. Time to save some money for one. Thanks

hannibals wrote:
Minarchist wrote:

Still loving the heck out of my unRaid install, FWIW. Now at 7TB, 12 drives and counting. :-)

unRaid looks interesting. So you trade speed for data reliability basically?

It's certainly very reliable, but I dunno about trading speed. Writing happens at a relatively low 11MB/sec or so, but I get reads in excess of 80MB/s, more than enough to stream a 40GB blu-ray without needing buffering. I've further sped up writing by adding a cache drive, which will store your writes until a set time each night (default is 3 AM) and then write them to the array. They're obviously unprotected during this time, so if you have a documents folder or something you really want to skip the cache drive you can set that up.

The big selling points for me were (a) I could build it from parts I had laying around, (b) I could mix and match drive capacities and manufacturers all the way up to 16 drives (!), and (c) it has a decent front-end so I don't need to learn linux. So far it's been rock-solid, and the guys on the forum give great support for troubleshooting and further customization.

hannibals wrote:

Did you consider Amahi? I'm strongly considering this as an alternative to FreeNAS. It runs on top of a Fedora (or Red Hat?) installation, but there is also an alpha for Ubuntu.

I am considering Amahi pretty strongly as well. I'm not too happy with their "buy space-bucks to get apps" approach and since Fedora is the preferred distro, I would have to give up on my plan of using ZFS and stick with EXT4. Apart from those nits, it's seems like a great fit.

The other option I'm thinking of is to use Ubuntu Server - I would lose some of the plug & play that comes with Amahi (esp. for storage management) but I'm familiar administering Linux servers so it shouldn't be too difficult, plus I'll get to use ZFS.

Just an update on my Ubuntu project:
Ran the server for a week and the heat + noise coming off of it was incredible. Big transfers ran slower than expected, but I didn't spend a lot of troubleshooting time on that. I had MediaTomb running, but ran into an issue where the GUI would become unavailable randomly and the system would fail to shut down properly. One of the downsides of using old hardware I guess. During this trial I also hit my first $100+ electric bill, but that could be because of the damn heat wave.
At this point I am back to looking at drive enclosures and I am tempted to try a minimalist approach first. Newegg has a 4 bay ESATA enclosure as one of their Shell Shocker deals scheduled for tonight.
SANS DIGITAL TR4M+BNC JBOD (Hard drives are accessed individually) 4 x Hot-Swappable 3.5" Drive Bays eSATA (via Port Multiplier) 4 Bay eSATA Port Multiplier JBOD Tower (no eSATA card bundled) (Black) for $75.

hannibals wrote:

Did you consider Amahi? I'm strongly considering this as an alternative to FreeNAS. It runs on top of a Fedora (or Red Hat?) installation, but there is also an alpha for Ubuntu.

So I was looking at the Amahi FAQ and it turns out that all folder sharing is done via Samba, which is uniformly panned as a bad choice for large file transfers (The Amahi FAQ itself mentions that transfers will top out at 10 MB/sec on a GigE network, which sounds terrible).

PS: NFS is supported, but UI level support is at Alpha level and reading forum threads suggests it's not a priority for the developers just yet.

I'm still going back and forth on the Ubuntu Server Ed. vs Amahi decision. Here's what I know so far:

Ubuntu Server Edition

  • DHCP needs conf file editing
  • DNS needs conf file editing (part of DHCP)
  • RAID Array will be using the Gnome Disk Utility (ZFS can be added via a repo)
  • Folder sharing can use NFS, but needs conf file editing
  • Music Streaming - for better features, use forked-daapd but it needs to be built from tarball
  • Movies/TV - Use Plex on the NAS and AppleTV
  • Backup - Amanda on the NAS, Windows PC's & Linux PC's. Mac's are limited to SMB shares

Amahi

  • DHCP is done via Web UI
  • DNS is via Web UI (part of DHCP)
  • RAID Array will be using the Gnome Disk Utility (ZFS can be added via a repo). There's also a kludgy Amahi-only solution called Grayhole that can work with different-sized disks.
  • Folder sharing is SMB-only, but comes with a UI
  • Music Streaming - AmahiTunes is reskinned mt-daapd, which has zero support.
  • Movies/TV - XBMC Install at Fedora level and XBMC Client on AppleTV
  • Backup - Amanda on the NAS, Windows PC's & Linux PC's. Mac's are limited to SMB shares

Anyone want to help me make up my mind?

avggeek wrote:

I'm still going back and forth on the Ubuntu Server Ed. vs Amahi decision. Here's what I know so far:/

I installed WebMin on my Ubuntu Server to give me remote GUI access to pretty much all the important configurations. Made things a lot easier.

Rezzy wrote:
avggeek wrote:

I'm still going back and forth on the Ubuntu Server Ed. vs Amahi decision. Here's what I know so far:/

I installed WebMin on my Ubuntu Server to give me remote GUI access to pretty much all the important configurations. Made things a lot easier.

I can't believe I forgot about WebMin! That takes care of the GUI for things like DHCP & NFS plus I don't need to worry about security since the server is behind a gateway. Ubuntu Server it is then!

So my el-cheapo, bare-bones enclosure arrived yesterday. Install was a snap. Drives detected immediately. 4TB striped Volume created and humming away. The purpose of this experiment is to get a power usage/performance profile for comparing a standalone server vs using the enclosure + my main system to host the media component.
I knew it would be faster by virtue of the direct connection, but I'm actually surprised at HOW fast it really is. Performance from Ubuntu as a NAS was... acceptable. Large transfers took multiple hours, but streaming content worked slick. So far the ESATA enclosure took a transfer at least four times as large in a single hour.

PS- On the Ubuntu side I am definitely taking into consideration that I am using old gaming-level hardware. Never really intended for an efficient server, but it's what I have on hand.

So you're still using Ubuntu to drive it, you just changed the storage mechanism? Or is it a standalone unit of some kind?

Oh, sure. Local storage is usually going to be much faster than networked storage, especially if it's RAIDed. Network wires are pretty skinny pipes compared to multiple SATA channels.

And you can share it from within Windows, so you get at least the basic filesharing that Ubuntu offers... the numerous other services are harder to set up, but filesharing is easy. It's much faster locally, and about the same speed as on any server for everyone else.

What you primarily lose is the ability to move your storage into another room for quiet. You also lose some ability to abstract your storage away from your main workstation; a rebuild on that machine means no file services on the network until you get it restored. It's much less common to rebuild a Linux box.

Nope this is attaching more disks to my main computer through an external chassis. Running the Ubuntu server as-is caused a huge power-usage spike and several degrees temperature rise in my study. So for 70 bucks I decided to check out this possibility. (also, looking at my Logmein stats my main system is basically running 24/7 anyway, so this might make a more elegant solution once I figure out the best way to host my media without cutting too much into my gaming performance. Kind of a sidestep from my initial plan... but considering that I'd pay almost as much just in taxes for a Drobo... I think it's a path worth exploring.

EDIT: Link to the enclosure. This was $75 from Newegg during one of their ShellShocker deals. No frills, no internal RAID, but pretty well put together. Comes with some tool-less screws to secure the drives, or you can just slide them in for hot-swapping. So far I'm pretty impressed.

Malor wrote:

What you primarily lose is the ability to move your storage into another room for quiet.

Not really an option at this point anyway. Small apartments are small.

You also lose some ability to abstract your storage away from your main workstation; a rebuild on that machine means no file services on the network until you get it restored. It's much less common to rebuild a Linux box.

This is the biggie. I have a test-case set up where I will attempt to remount the drive using my netbook or laptop for those scenarios, but I'm still hoping to offload at some point. I think the ESATA will help me start partitioning my data properly for use in that scenario while minimizing the pain or the initial transition.

Anyone have experience with this?

I don't have an in-home NAS at the moment, but I realized with 3 pcs and several mobile devices now I'd really like to centrally back up video, photos, and OS images.