> Timely discussion. I too am trying to build a stable yet inexpensive storage
> server for my home lab
[...]
> Other options are that I build a whitebox or buy a new PowerEdge or Sun
> X2200 etc
If this is really just a lab storage server then an X2100M2 will be
enough. Just get the minimum spe
> (2) You want a 64-bit CPU. So that probably rules
> out your P4 machines,
> unless they were extremely late-model P4s with the
> EM64T features.
> Given that file-serving alone is relatively low-CPU,
> you can get away
> with practically any 64-bit capable CPU made in the
> last 4 years.
A
On Jun 2, 2008, at 3:24 AM 6/2/, Erik Trimble wrote:
> Keith Bierman wrote:
>> On May 30, 2008, at 6:59 PM, Erik Trimble wrote:
>>
>>
>>> The only drawback of the older Socket 940 Opterons is that they
>>> don't
>>> support the hardware VT extensions, so running a Windows guest
>>> under x
Keith Bierman wrote:
> On May 30, 2008, at 6:59 PM, Erik Trimble wrote:
>
>
>> The only drawback of the older Socket 940 Opterons is that they don't
>> support the hardware VT extensions, so running a Windows guest
>> under xVM
>> on them isn't currently possible.
>>
>
>
>
> From the Vir
On May 30, 2008, at 6:59 PM, Erik Trimble wrote:
> The only drawback of the older Socket 940 Opterons is that they don't
> support the hardware VT extensions, so running a Windows guest
> under xVM
> on them isn't currently possible.
From the VirtualBox manual, page 11
• No hardware virtua
Brandon High wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 10:58 PM, Marc Bevand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> For example the Abit AB9 Pro (about $80-90) comes with 10 SATA ports (9
>> internal + 1 internal): 6 from the ICH8R chipset (driver: ahci), 2 from a
>> JMB363 chip (driver: ahci in snv_82 and abov
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 10:58 PM, Marc Bevand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For example the Abit AB9 Pro (about $80-90) comes with 10 SATA ports (9
> internal + 1 internal): 6 from the ICH8R chipset (driver: ahci), 2 from a
> JMB363 chip (driver: ahci in snv_82 and above, see bug 6645543), and 2 fro
On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 7:06 AM, Justin Vassallo
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> WD supply enterprise class SATA drives whose prevailing feature is a low
> TLER (RE series). This makes the drive report a failed block quickly, rather
> than trying to recover the blocks for minutes. In a consumer PC, th
Bob said:
> SATA "enterprise" drives seem more like a gimmick than anything else.
> Perhaps the warranty is longer and they include a tiny bit more smarts
> in the firmware.
WD supply enterprise class SATA drives whose prevailing feature is a low
TLER (RE series). This makes the drive report a f
SS wrote:
> Timely discussion. I too am trying to build a stable yet inexpensive storage
> server for my home lab mostly for playing in the VM world as well as general
> data storage. I've considered several options ranging from the simple linux
> based NAS appliances to older EMC SANs. I finall
Timely discussion. I too am trying to build a stable yet inexpensive storage
server for my home lab mostly for playing in the VM world as well as general
data storage. I've considered several options ranging from the simple linux
based NAS appliances to older EMC SANs. I finally decided to build
Marc Bevand gmail.com> writes:
>
> What I hate about mobos with no onboard video is that these days it is
> impossible to find cheap fanless video cards. So usually I just go headless.
Didn't finish my sentence: ...fanless and *power-efficient*.
Most cards consume 20+W when idle. This alone is
Brandon High freaks.com> writes:
>
> I'm going to be putting together a home NAS
> based on OpenSolaris using the following:
> 1 SUPERMICRO CSE-743T-645B Black Chassis
> 1 ASUS M2N-LR AM2 NVIDIA nForce Professional 3600 ATX Server Motherboard
> 1 SUPERMICRO AOC-SAT2-MV8 64-bit PCI
Brandon High wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 6:57 PM, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> USED hardware is your friend :) He wasn't quoting new prices.
>>
>
> Not really an apples-to-apples comparison then, is it? Cruising eBay
> for parts isn't my idea of reproducible or supportable.
>
>
Brandon High wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 5:59 PM, Erik Trimble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> One thought on this:for a small server, which is unlikely to ever be CPU
>> bound, I would suggest looking for an older dual-Socket 940 Opteron
>> motherboard. They almost all have many PCI-X
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 6:57 PM, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> USED hardware is your friend :) He wasn't quoting new prices.
Not really an apples-to-apples comparison then, is it? Cruising eBay
for parts isn't my idea of reproducible or supportable.
Sure, an older server could possibly fall i
USED hardware is your friend :) He wasn't quoting new prices.
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 8:54 PM, Brandon High <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 5:59 PM, Erik Trimble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > One thought on this:for a small server, which is unlikely to ever be
> CPU
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 5:59 PM, Erik Trimble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One thought on this:for a small server, which is unlikely to ever be CPU
> bound, I would suggest looking for an older dual-Socket 940 Opteron
> motherboard. They almost all have many PCI-X slots, and single-core
> Opte
Brandon High wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Orvar Korvar
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> In a PCI-X slot, you will reach something like 1.5GB/sec which should
>> suffice for most needs. Maybe it is cheaper to buy that card + PCI-X
>> motherboard (only found on server mobos) than
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Orvar Korvar
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a PCI-X slot, you will reach something like 1.5GB/sec which should suffice
> for most needs. Maybe it is cheaper to buy that card + PCI-X motherboard
> (only found on server mobos) than buying a SAS or PCI-express, if
Im using the AOC card with 8 SATA-2 ports too. It got detected automatically
during Solaris install. Works great. And it is cheap. Ive heard that it is the
same chipset as used in X4500 thumper with 48 drives?
In a PCI, the PCI bottle necks at ~150MB/sec, or so.
In a PCI-X slot, you will reach
I've had a RAIDZ/ZFS File Server since Update 2, so I thought I'd share my
setup.
Opteron FX-51 (2.3Ghz, Socket 939)
Asus SK8N
4x 512MB EBB Unbuffered DDR1 Memory
2x Skymaster PCI-X 4 Port SATA (based on SI3114 Chipset). currently deployed
over 2x PCI ports on the motherboard.
1x Intel 10/100 N
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 12:01:36PM -0400, Bill McGonigle wrote:
> On May 28, 2008, at 05:11, James Andrewartha wrote:
>
> That's not a huge price difference when building a server - thanks
> for the pointer. Are there any 'gotchas' the list can offer when
> using a SAS card with SATA drives?
http://blogs.sun.com/relling/entry/adaptec_webinar_on_disks_and
-- richard
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Wed, 28 May 2008, Brandon High wrote:
>
>> CMU released a study comparing the MTBF enterprise class drive with
>> consumer drives, and found no real differences.
>>
>
> That should reall
On Wed, 28 May 2008, Brandon High wrote:
> CMU released a study comparing the MTBF enterprise class drive with
> consumer drives, and found no real differences.
That should really not be a surprise. Chips are chips and in the
economies of scale, as few chips will be be used as possible. The
qu
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 9:27 AM, Richard Elling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are BigDriveCos which sell enterprise-class SATA drives.
> Since the mechanics are the same, the difference is in the electronics
> and software. Vote with your pocketbook for the enterprise-class
> products.
CMU r
On Wed, 2008-05-28 at 10:34 -0600, Keith Bierman wrote:
> On May 28, 2008, at 10:27 AM 5/28/, Richard Elling wrote:
>
> > Since the mechanics are the same, the difference is in the electronics
>
>
> In my very distant past, I did QA work for an electronic component
> manufacturer. Even parts
On May 28, 2008, at 10:27 AM 5/28/, Richard Elling wrote:
> Since the mechanics are the same, the difference is in the electronics
In my very distant past, I did QA work for an electronic component
manufacturer. Even parts which were "identical" were expected to
behave quite differently .
Bill McGonigle wrote:
> On May 28, 2008, at 05:11, James Andrewartha wrote:
>
>
>> From what I can tell, all the vendors are only making SAS
>> controllers for
>> PCIe with more than 4 ports. Since SAS supports SATA, I guess they
>> don't see
>> much point in doing SATA-only controllers.
>>
On May 28, 2008, at 05:11, James Andrewartha wrote:
> From what I can tell, all the vendors are only making SAS
> controllers for
> PCIe with more than 4 ports. Since SAS supports SATA, I guess they
> don't see
> much point in doing SATA-only controllers.
>
> For example, the LSI SAS3081E-R i
Erik Trimble wrote:
> On a related note - does anyone know of a good Solaris-supported 4+ port
> SATA card for PCI-Express? Preferably 1x or 4x slots...
From what I can tell, all the vendors are only making SAS controllers for
PCIe with more than 4 ports. Since SAS supports SATA, I guess they
I'm using a gigabyte I-RAM card with cheap memory for my slog device with great
results. Of course I don't have as much memory as you do in my project box. I
also want to use the left over space on the I-ram and dual purpose it for a
readzilla cache device and slog. Picked it up off ebay along
| > Primarily cost, reliability (less complex hw = less hw that can
| > fail), and serviceability (no need to rebuy the exact same raid card
| > model when it fails, any SATA controller will do).
|
| As long as the RAID is self-contained on the card, and the disks are
| exported as JBOD, then you s
Which of these SATA controllers have people been able to use with SMART
and ZFS boot in Solaris?
Cheers,
11011011
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Marc Bevand wrote:
> Kyle McDonald Egenera.COM> writes:
>
>> Marc Bevand wrote:
>>
>>> Overall, like you I am frustrated by the lack of non-RAID inexpensive
>>> native PCI-E SATA controllers.
>>>
>> Why non-raid? Is it cost?
>>
>
> Primarily cost, reliability (less complex hw =
> More system RAM does not help synchronous writes go much faster.
agreed, but it does make sure all the asynchronous writes are
batched and the tgx group isn't committed early keeping everything
synchronous. (default batch is every 5 sec)
> If you want good write performance, instead of addin
On Sun, 25 May 2008, Marc Bevand wrote:
>
> Primarily cost, reliability (less complex hw = less hw that can fail),
> and serviceability (no need to rebuy the exact same raid card model
> when it fails, any SATA controller will do).
As long as the RAID is self-contained on the card, and the disks a
Kyle McDonald Egenera.COM> writes:
> Marc Bevand wrote:
> >
> > Overall, like you I am frustrated by the lack of non-RAID inexpensive
> > native PCI-E SATA controllers.
>
> Why non-raid? Is it cost?
Primarily cost, reliability (less complex hw = less hw that can fail),
and serviceability (no need
Marc Bevand wrote:
>
> Overall, like you I am frustrated by the lack of non-RAID inexpensive native
> PCI-E SATA controllers.
>
>
>
Why non-raid? Is it cost?
Personally I'm interested in a high port count RAID card, with as much
battery-backed cache RAM as possible, and that can export as man
Tim tcsac.net> writes:
>
> So we're still stuck the same place we were a year ago. No high port
> count pci-E compatible non-raid sata cards. You'd think with all the
> demand SOMEONE would've stepped up to the plate by now. Marvell, cmon ;)
Here is a 6-port SATA PCI-Express x1 controller for
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Brandon High <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:43 PM, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm looking on their site and don't even see any data on the 3134... this
> > *something new* that hasn't been released or? The only thing I see is
> 313
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:43 PM, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm looking on their site and don't even see any data on the 3134... this
> *something new* that hasn't been released or? The only thing I see is 3132.
There isn't a 3134, but there is a 3124, which is a PCI-X based 4-port.
-B
-
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 2:36 PM, Brian Hechinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:25:34PM -0700, Erik Trimble wrote:
> > >
> > >I'm running a 3124 with snv81 and haven't had a single problem with it.
> > >Whatever problems you ran into have likely been resolved.
> > >
> > Th
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:25:34PM -0700, Erik Trimble wrote:
> >
> >I'm running a 3124 with snv81 and haven't had a single problem with it.
> >Whatever problems you ran into have likely been resolved.
> >
> The Silicon Image 3114 also works like a champ, but it's SATA 1.0 only.
> It's dirt cheap
Brian Hechinger wrote:
> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:47:18AM -0700, Pascal Vandeputte wrote:
>
>> I sold it and took the cheap route again with a Silicon Image 3124-based
>> adapter and had more problems which now probably would be solved with the
>> latest Solaris updates.
>>
>
> I'm runn
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:47:18AM -0700, Pascal Vandeputte wrote:
>
> I sold it and took the cheap route again with a Silicon Image 3124-based
> adapter and had more problems which now probably would be solved with the
> latest Solaris updates.
I'm running a 3124 with snv81 and haven't had a s
That 1420SA will not work, period. Type "1420sa solaris" in Google and you'll
find a thread about the problems I had with it.
I sold it and took the cheap route again with a Silicon Image 3124-based
adapter and had more problems which now probably would be solved with the
latest Solaris updates
David Francis wrote:
> Greetings all
>
> I was looking at creating a little ZFS storage box at home using the
> following SATA controllers (Adaptec Serial ATA II RAID 1420SA) on Opensolaris
> X86 build
>
> Just wanted to know if anyone out there is using these and can vouch for
> them. If not if
I've had great luck with my Supermicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 card so far. I'm
using it in an old PCI slot, so it's probably not as fast as it could
be, but it worked great right out of the box.
-Aaron
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:09 AM, David Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Greetings all
>
> I was lo
Greetings all
I was looking at creating a little ZFS storage box at home using the following
SATA controllers (Adaptec Serial ATA II RAID 1420SA) on Opensolaris X86 build
Just wanted to know if anyone out there is using these and can vouch for them.
If not if there's something else you can reco
50 matches
Mail list logo
