• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About clicker666

  • Rank
  1. clicker666

    SAN Vs NAS

    For a small network I would just use a small file server. Either Windows or some Linux distro. SAN is probably overkill, and if you don't have an expert on hand you could lose a lot of data if things go wrong. Keep it simple. SAN is a block level device - it's a specialized box that acts like a big fast hard drive. You need a server that can connect to it. NAS is a storage device attached to your network with shares on it. (Generally) SAN would likely be a lot more expensive than NAS. So I would build a small file server with good hard drive redundancy and a backup strategy.
  2. clicker666

    Storage for small-medium business

    I'm running the 60-day eval so I can take full advantage of all the features for a bit and get everything the way I like, so my config page doesn't show the same. Looking at it shows that the free version supports multiple physical CPUs. It always did, so I can't see why they'd change that. Guess I'll find out at day 60 when I have to panic and buy it lol.
  3. clicker666

    Surest way to destroy data on SSD

    Your idea of putting 24v across the might not succeed if it burns out some link along the way to the chips. DBAN (Darik's Boot and Nuke, free) for home user or business without tons of super secure data. A little more sensitive? Do the original then follow up by removing case and beating with a hammer into little tiny pieces, then (if even more sensitive) blowtorch. The almost ultimate would be industrial shredder then melt. If that's not enough, DBAN and put in a safe until someone figures out a way to securely erase SSDs.
  4. clicker666

    About Sata Hard disk

    You can't really say, it's like asking how much is a house? It's usually on the data sheet that's included with the hard drive. A little poking around on the net might also yield it.
  5. clicker666

    SAN Vs NAS

    Stoyan - you could create a share on an iSCSI link based on the underlying file system though. (like we were talking about for my system) So he could have OpenFiler connected via iSCSI to a Windows 2003 server, and create a SMB share on that server for the workstations. The iSCSI link would be running block level from Openfiler to Server, and file level from Server to workstations? I'm not entirely sure, because I haven't had the opportunity to try yet, but I figured Stoyan might know.
  6. clicker666

    Storage for small-medium business

    I just did some reading on the Free ESXi 5 and the only limits are 32 GB RAM, can only manage one host at a time, and no command line. You can run as many CPUs and cores as your heart desires.
  7. clicker666

    Storage for small-medium business

    I've decided to continue using my E200i card, but switch the array to RAID 10 (6 disks total) with 2 hotspares (final total = 8). I'm going to flatten the entire array and create it in the new format rather than waste hours migrating. I then plan to install ESXi 5 and do a VM migration of the VDMK machines to ESXi. As far as OpenFiler iSCSI goes, the performance (on my Windows 8 machine) is head and shoulders above the straight copy functionality of the OS. One little iSCSI question I just need confirmation on, because I'm pretty sure i know the answer. I have two 2 port (4 connector) 2 GbE cards. Can I pop one into the ESXi box and the other into the OpenFiler NAS, then have the Windows server inside ESXi see the iSCSI target like an attached drive - and therefore be able to make a Windows server-based share on this iSCSI target? The result I'm looking for is a very fast share that can retain the old share name. example: \\SERVER\COMPANY on old VM's D: drive moves to \\SERVER\COMPANY on the VM's iSCSI connection?
  8. clicker666

    Storage for small-medium business

    1. The sticker shock on that unit might be too much for management. Especially since I would have to have a spare on-hand. 2. I'm planning on flashing the BIOS on the existing RAID card to a new version that's supposed to eliminate the missing array on boot issue. It looks as if people have had better performance with the E200i by dropping RAID 5 and going to RAID10 with a single volume spanning 8 drives. I've also been thinking about changing the hard drives on that server to the SSD's (as you've indicated). There's currently almost 500 GB on that server, but I'll be dropping a bunch of that once I move the shares to the iSCSI (below) bring it down to 350. The only problem I see with swtiching to SSD is the Intel 330's you mention are SATA3 and my system is SAS with SATA2. 3. I've been using OpenFiler and have been experimenting with iSCSI. Good write/read speeds off of my test bed. I'm planning on running the company shared files, user shared folders, and storing backups on this device. I also plan on doing a backup to external drives of the OpenFiler box. 4. What would you consider a 3 tier backup? My only real issue with tapes (cost of drive and media can be easier for management to digest for some reason) is that you have to maintain a way to utilize them down the road. In our case, 7 years of storage is required. I can't actually produce that now because our tape drives from 7 years ago won't even install on a modern computer.
  9. This is a long one. I've been running this system for a few years and the recent growth of data is becoming worrisome. Supermicro SuperChassis 745TQ-R800B with a X7DWN+ mainboard running 2 quad core Xeon E5410s running 2.33 GHz with 16 GB RAM. The RAID card is a bit of a dog. It's a HP Smart Array E200 SAS Controller with 128 MB RAM and a battery backup. My initial plan was to have two arrays and volumes, one holding the host, a Win 2003 x64 server, my SBS 2003 server VM and the other volume holding a few smaller VMs. (accounting and remote desktop) I had two 3 disk RAID 5 arrays with a hotspare in place for each, for a total of 8 drives. The array cache is enabled, and accelerator ratio is 50:50. Physical drive write caches are on. (Connected to a UPS and battery on controller). The drives are all WDC WD5000ABYS-0 drives running SATA 1 (150 Gbps). The initial plan had to be scrapped as drive thrashing was killing my system. The performance of the card is horrible. I intend to replace it, but my SBS VM is HUGE, and the time involved in moving it would be problematic. In addition, the backup for that VM is hit an miss since it's so large. I've had to become selective on backing up files which is also problematic. The final problem with this huge VM is that it takes a long time to shutdown. The power in my facility is atrocious, and everything has it's own line conditioner and UPS. It still takes a good 5 minutes to shut down, and a good 15 to come back up. WAYYYY too long. My current thoughts are that the server is still pretty fast. It just needs a better RAID controller. I also need to lighten up the SBS VM. I was thinking of moving the shared company folders and user shared directories to a NAS of some sort. That would reduce the size of the SBS VM from 254 GB to 104 GB. (150 GB in User/Shared Dirs) There would probably be a bit more as well as some of that is client apps and the like. So, any thoughts? 1. I need a new SAS controller. I picked up some of those Datoptic SPM393 driverless 1-5 raid controllers that smokes the HP. The only real downside to this type of controller is the lack of battery backup. 2. I need to figure out a RAID scheme for the new controller that is best suited for running VMs, in particular an SBS VM. (Exchange stores) 3. I need a stinking fast box running anything that can hold all those 150+ GB of shared/user files. It needs to have hot swap redundancy for disk failures. Linux / FreeNAS is not out of the question, I've used them. The ability to put this box on a UPS and have it safely shut down is paramount. The Norco DS-24ER looks interesting, redundant power supplies are nice, and if I use 2.5" drives cooling should be pretty easy. 4. What do you guys use for offsite backups nowadays? I've grown out of my tapes and I'm using blu-ray disks now, but this is time consuming. I need to be able to pull out files from a few years back when asked and produce a user's directory for whatever date is asked for. Keeping a tape drive on hand for each type of media is pointless as I can't even hook up half of them anymore.