Terabyte File Server for $5,000 133
pluto378 writes: "SDSC has a report on their attempt to build a Terabyte fileserver for less than $5,000."
It is better to live rich than to die rich. -- Samuel Johnson
Re:Let's post the same comment over and over! (Score:1)
"Gee, I wonder how much pr0n it could hold. Hahaha!
Gee, I wonder how many MP3's it could hold. Hahaha! (some stoopid reference to Napster would be in order)
Gee, I wonder how many different distros of Linux I could install? Hahaha!
Could you imagine a Beowulf cluster of these? Hahah!"
A way to do this (Score:1)
Not to rain on their parade (Score:4)
18(*) WD 60 GB hard drives ($2250)
3 Hotrod ATA/100 controllers ($180)
Powered enclosure ($200)
Custom extra-long IDE cables ($150)
Get a motherboard with 4 IDE channels (most "raid versions" have this) and plug 12 drives into the Hotrods, 4 into the motherboard's raid channels, and 2 into the secondary ide channel. The boot hard drive goes on the primary ide channel.
The total cost of this server is still under $3500 after supplying the rest of the computer. As long as you don't need 24/7 uptime or massive throughput, this is enough for 1 TB of directly available storage.
(*) This is a bit more than 1 TB but you have to account for space lost during formatting.
Re:Machrone's Law? (Score:2)
Down that path lies madness. On the other hand, the road to hell is paved with melting snowballs.
Terabyte? (Score:1)
Holy crap. $5000?? I could even afford that. Can you say... pr0n server!!!!
Word!
--
Kir
Re:Machrone's Law? (Score:1)
Computer, hell... the car I want always costs $5000! I should stop spending my hard earned money on misc. hardware and beer.
Word!
--
Kir
Re:Terabyte? (Score:1)
...but not Office XP.
Word!
--
Kir
Re:That's alot of space (for MP3s of course!) (Score:2)
Re:Speed? (Score:1)
Re:SDSC != Netapp (Score:2)
Re:Any real use for this? (Score:5)
Re:Not to rain on their parade (Score:2)
The OS could then be asked to make a software RAID of those. I.e. with 5 controlers you could have 1.2 TB at a sane cost.
Perhaps not under $5,000 but still sane.
Re:Speed? (Score:1)
I was just going to ask the same thing. Maybe he meant that the system itself was able to access the disks at 25 MB/sec?
Re:Uhm, What About Backup? (Score:1)
Re:Machrone's Law? (Score:2)
Re:Speed? (Score:1)
Re:Backups ? (Score:1)
DLT would of course choke a horrid death on this. Although I have seen some pretty interesting DLT setups. The best was using another 4 port 100baseT card off a sun with each port doing a specific set of mount points to a DLT with 4 drives. That thing could backup a ton of data in one evening.
Uhm, What About Backup? (Score:2)
Good grief, what do you back up a terabyte onto these days?
Jon Acheson
Sweet... (Score:2)
Nice, but what use 50MB/s speed with 10MB/s net? (Score:2)
In particular, they claim to get 50 MB/sec transfer rates from their disk array. But, you can see that they also specify just a 10 MB/sec 100BaseTX ethernet; so 80% of that bandwidth is completely wasted.
I was curious what people's solutions to this are. Does one just get multiple 100BaseTX ethernet connections to a switch, or are people going Gigabit ethernet from the fileserver to the switch?
I plan to go the second route. There are many ethernet switches out there with one or two gigabit ports such as this 3COM switch [3com.com]. This should give 100MB/sec to the switch, and then the switch can distribute this bandwidth to all the client machines at 10MB/sec.
At least this is a reasonable stopgap until Gigabit Ethernet is more ubiquitous.
Any comments?
thad
$1000 in 2003 (Score:2)
A quarter of that in 2003.
Re:Backups ? (Score:1)
It's not an inexpensive solution, and it presumes you have a facility someplace offsite to mirror to. Storing 1TB is easy, managing 1TB isn't.
Re:Backups ? (Score:1)
We've been looking at re-doing our storage, and the ability to do backups transparently to disk is quite compelling.
this is what i've been doing (Score:1)
$ df
Filesystem 1k-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda1 80636044 2412332 74127544 4% /
/dev/sda3 466820072 8225276 434881652 2%
/dev/sdb1 20161172 6528 19130504 1%
/dev/sdb2 531336984 6593064 497753516 2%
I spent the last few days building a third one. It was all good until i tested some disks on it. The escalades weren't detected the disks all of the time. Yesterday was wasted attempting different combinations of disks and positions. I have no idea whats wrong. Worst of all the setup is practically identical to the machine i'm posting from which never had a problem.
I've just been told that this machine i'm posting from cost us around $10K.
I have to go put the rack together meanwhile send me some pr0n please i have the space.
Re:Machrone's Law? (Score:2)
Re:Machrone's Law? (Score:2)
Re:SDSC != Netapp (Score:1)
As you increase file size the filler takes longer and longer to return write acks. The more ram cache you have on the filler, the worse it gets. The exact symptoms have under linux, but on linux I can get to a command propmt, and type 'sync'. As soon the prompt returns, AIX is off and running again. This does not happen if I use Solaris. I did not have the time to try any xBSDs. NetApp was confused, IBM was confused.
Backups are inherently cheap, as well (Score:3)
Even if you don't do incremental backups, it's still a bargain. Hell, get some more of these teraservers and do software RAID between them; this is phenomenally cheap space, folks. For the price that companies are paying for this kind of space currently, you could buy tens of terabytes of space and make it octuple-redundant and still knock a heap of cash off of your capital budget.
Re:Backups are inherently cheap, as well (Score:3)
The bandwidth costs are irrelevant since they apply to any backup/clustering technology, and it's quite obvious that it's cheaper to buy lots of $5k terabytes and spread 'em out across the country than any of the big guys' "commercial enterprise-class solutions."
When in doubt, have your company buy 10 more terabytes just to be on the safe side. It's only $50k! Most manager-level positions at Fortune 500s can sign off on a purchase that size.
This stuff is great! Give terabytes as stocking-stuffers to your kids at Christmas.
Re:SDSC != Netapp (Score:4)
A quick search on google yields this:
$20k for a terabyte of rackmountable RAID5 [208.56.182.73]
Believe it, folks: Terabytes really are as cheap as the Slashdot headline makes it seem like they are.
Re:$1000 in 2003 (Score:1)
----------------------------------------------
Correction... (Score:1)
Price dropping as we speak (Score:1)
# * size = cost/mb
10 & 100 = $2710, 1000GB
14 & 80 = $2405, 1040GB (might need to add another controller)
NIC: $20 D-Link DFE-530TX+ (Linux works great)
$58 for 20GB Fujitsu HD
$210 for Yeong-Yang Cube server case
(as someone mentioned)
$105 for 3 * $35 for 512Mb ram
Worst part is this you NEED 2 - 3ware Excalade 8600 8 port contoller cards $345 each (8 drives per card) OUCH!!!!!
(I don't see why these boards are priced more than a GeForce 3 - $299)
The raid you are refering to only support mirroring, and only 4 drives per card.(4 on board- 4 card)
(Yeong-Yang cube case)
15bay-6bay(V)+2bay(V)+7bay(H)
- ATX cube server case w/300w ps
IMHO: I don't like the intel etherexpress - too many weird boards out there that don't work right (100b chipset)
Re:SDSC != Netapp (Score:2)
It does snapshots on top of most filesystems!
Re:How about... (Score:2)
Re:Machrone's Law? (Score:1)
Real cars cost real money.
--
Cheapass RAM! (Score:2)
Now I feel silly that I dropped twice that on my half gig... sigh.
-grendel drago
Re:But I wanted a Pedabyte file server... (Score:1)
SDSC != Netapp (Score:5)
Netapp filers are expensive, but excellent because the filesystem (designed by former SGI employees, who designed XFS) rocks. It's fast, it's damn reliable, and the "snapshot" feature kicks ass. Also, their NFS implementation works flawlessly (and this is a *rare* thing) .
So SDSC has a nice project on the hardware part, but I wouldn't trust them for production servers.
-- Pure FTP server [pureftpd.org] - Upgrade your FTP server to something simple and secure.
D-I-Y Fileserver (Score:4)
- 180$ for Motherboard ABIT KT7A-RAID
- 138$ for 1GHz Thunderbird
- 130$ for 3 * 256Mt Dimm PC-133
- 71$ for GeForce 2 mx (Overkill for a fileserver)
- 83$ for 10GB MAXTOR (for booting
- 38$ for A CD-Rom drive (might be needed when installing OS)
- 51$ for Inter EtherExpress PRO100
- 58$ for HTP370 IDE Raid controller
- 290$ for BIIIG Case
- 2900$ for 10 * MAXTOR 100GB
- 145$ for 10 * IDE Rack (It is nice to have a cooler for each HDD)
Total: 4085$ for Big Ass Fileserver
This leaves us 900$ (plus discount) for extra stuff like gigabit ethernet, monitor, keyboard and mouse etc.
In a non-free world (Score:5)
Wayne: "Hi, everyone. Today, we're gonna make a cheap 1TB file server"
Garth: "That's right. We're going to be using the new Windows XP OS."
Wayne: "Yes, Apple's stuff is too proprietary. MS is the open alternative."
Both: "MS rules. Apple sucks. MS rules. Apple sucks."
Wayne: "Alright, that was cool. Anyway, we've got an Intel chip {ed note: No AMD, either}, some RAM, case, power supply. We've just got one drive hooked up to see if this thing will boot."
Garth: (Turns on power) "Alright Wayne, I'm installing XP. It will take a while. Commercials?"
Wayne: "Yeah, we'll be right back."
{Commercials}
Wayne: "Alright, we're back. Had to call MS to register, but we're up. Everything looks good. It's a little slow, so we're going to add some memory while we add drives."
{Time passes}
Garth: "OK. Well, XP says that we need to re-register. Commercial?"
Wayne: "Alright."
{Commercial}
Wayne: "Well, the nice lady at MS chastised us for changing our system, but she let us off with a warning." {W&G both laugh} "Anyway, we've got a new registration code and we're well on our way to 1 TeraByte of storage!"
Both: "Woohoo! MS Rules. MS Rules."
Garth: "Alright, so we're up to 256 MB of RAM, 200GB of hard disk space. We'll add a new controller, add some more memory since this thing still seems a little slow and we'll be right back."
{Time does its thing}
Wayne: "OK, we're back. Had to call MS again. They were a little peeved this time." {Shoots Garth a knowing look and both kind of chuckle} "Anyway, they were gracious enough to let us have another registration code. Thanks, Bill." {Laughs}
Garth: "Yeah, and someone called and wanted to know why we need 1TB of storage."
Wayne: "Yeah, like that's not obvious. Between us and all our friends, we've been to every major rock concert in a 500 mile radius of Chicage for about 10 years now."
Garth: {Whispering, looking furtively around} "And, even though nobody knows..."
Both: {Yelling in glee} "We've taped every show."
Wayne: "Thousands and thousands of hours of rock. We're going to rip 'em all - Hey, Garth, 'Rip em all', is that a Metallica album?"
Garth: {chuckles} "Good one, Wayne. Good one."
Wayne: "Thanks. Anyway, we're going to rip 'em all, catalog 'em, rate 'em, and listen to 'em until we get sick of 'em."
Garth: "OK Wayne. Things look good. It's still a little slow. Maybe a faster chip and some more RAM. Perhaps we should've gone SCSI. It should be alright for just serving MP3's, though."
Wayne: "OK. We'll be right back."
{Time, again}
Garth: "We're back. Wayne's getting some water. He got a little hoarse begging MS for another activation code. For a minute, it looked like we weren't going to get it, but Wayne talked 'em out of one. Here he is now."
Wayne: "Thanks, Garth. It's alright, just some red tape. No problems. MS rules!"
Garth: {Sounding not so sure} "Yeah, MS rules!"
Wayne: "OK, Garth what do we have?"
Garth: "We got a faster chip, we're up to 512MB of RAM, and..." {drumroll} "...we've got 1 TeraByte of storage!!"
Wayne: "Alright, Garth. Party on. Are we ready to serve up some MP3's?"
Garth: "No. I think we're going to need to up the RAM again, this thing is still slow. Also," {Laughs ruefully} "We don't have a network card yet. No sound card, either."
Wayne: {laughs too} "Alright then, Garth. Down one more time and this will be it. Right?"
Garth: "Sure thing, Wayne."
{The commercial break seems to last forever.}
Wayne: "Sorry we took so long. We ummm... ran into a slight snag. It appears that MS won't give us any more access codes for 6 months."
Garth: "Bummer, dude!"
Re:Any real use for this? (Score:1)
Anyway, my point is that the data is totally expendable. All of it can be restored simply by running the same scripts that keep the data updated with rsync.
Daniel
---
Re:Speed? (Score:2)
Re:Not to rain on their parade (Score:5)
Get a motherboard with 4 IDE channels (most "raid versions" have this) and plug 12 drives into the Hotrods, 4 into the motherboard's raid channels, and 2 into the secondary ide channel. The boot hard drive goes on the primary ide channel.
Ouch! Spend a few hundred more, and get an Escalade Storage Switch [3ware.com]. They perform very well and aren't wildly expensive (you should be able to have an 8-channel 32-bit, 33Mhz version for under $500.00). You also have your motherboard IDE channels free for things like DVD-ROM drives... heh heh... Lots of DVD-ROM drives... Heh heh...
Ahh, yes-- and there are Linux drivers available for the Escalade controllers. If you're looking for wild amounts of performance, they do have a 66Mhz, 64-bit PCI version available, too. Wowza.
Promise [promise.com] has their SuperTrak controller, which looks very interesting, but based on some messages I saw flying around on the Kernel List, apparently it's not as straightforward as just compiling in I2O support to use it under Linux. Grrr...
Check out this review [storagereview.com] and this review [neoseeker.com] if you want to see how the Escalade stacked up to other "high end" IDE RAID controllers.
That's easy (Score:2)
.. (Score:1)
Mr. Taco, if you read this, please cache these people's sites, before you cost them hundreds or thousands of dollars.
--
microsoft, it's what's for dinner
bq--3b7y4vyll6xi5x2rnrj7q.com
Re:Machrone's Law? (Score:1)
My experience (Score:1)
We put 8 80 GB maxtors and an Escalade 6800 in an old Gateway P166 tower with 32 MB, an extra power supply, 3 extra fans, and 2 NICs, running Linux 2.4 kernel running recent NFS code.
The only trouble was when I tried to format the drives with Partition Magic; it couldn't handle the size and corrupted my partition table! It's now running great. A drive died once, but came back online; the rebuild ran flawlessly. PS whoever posted about using PowerFile should have checked the prices first.
I have a hard copy of http://www.raidzone.com [raidzone.com] taped to the side of the box.
It's used to send and retrieve large files over the 'net; I haven't even bothered to benchmark it, as the 'net will be the bottleneck.
Re:I have a better idea... (Score:2)
What I would use this system for is creating a single media center for my entire family. Everyone would give me their records/tapes/CDs, I would convert them to MP3s and burn them to the collection. They would give me their video tapes/DVDs, I would encode them as DivX or something and burn them to the collection
Then any time they wanted to watch or listen to any record, tape, CD, video, or DVD it would be as close as the nearest computers (or entertainment center by making a nice TV-out PC). The originals could all go into storage in a nice, safe, dry place.
- JoeShmoe
Re:I have a better idea... (Score:2)
Not to mention, the intent was to migrate an entire collection of data that would be offline storage to online storage without wasting hard drive space. If the data is a bunch of audio or video files it is pointless to have read/write access since the data doesn't change. If you need to "delete" it you can take the CD/DVD out of the unit.
- JoeShmoe
Re:I have a better idea... (Score:2)
But you are still wrong that there is any sort of filesize limitation. The filesize limitation is a function of the Linux thinserver, not the disc hardware. After all, any modern hard drive can only store 1/6 of its data per platter but you don't have to worry about that, do you?
If you wanted to save a file larger than 700MB then the thinserver would just have to know to split it into multiple CDs but present the file as a single directory entry (file.mpg instead of file0.mpg file1.mpg and file2.mpg).
- JoeShmoe
I have a better idea... (Score:4)
A carousel that holds 200-300 CDs or DVDs (just like they have for home theaters for around $800)
Sort of like the stuff PowerFile [dvdchanger.com] makes. (http://www.dvdchanger.com)
Add to it room for at least two slot-load drives (although four would be even better, one in each corner) so you can access at least two CDs at any given time.
Throw in a Linux thinserver (like the stuff Linksys or any number of companies use) to manange the contents of each CD/DVD.
Result? Over 1TB of storage for around $1000. The only catch is that it is not meant for more than a handful of users at a time.
But considering what an equivalent RAID would cost it doesn't seem like a bad idea. You could put every file you've ever downloaded into one box and each CD/DVD could show up as a separate directory on one master volume. Imagine that. Near-instant access to TB of info.
If you use DVD-ROM drives, it's 1TB of read-only storage but if you use DVD-R/RW/RAM drives then it is 1TV of read/write storage! Wow, you could open your own Avalon!
Please please someone start a project to help build something like this! I desperately want one but the crappy PowerFile version is junk because it relies on crappy Windows/Mac software and ties up a whole computers just to access the damn thing. Plus having to manually mount/unmount the discs like individual drives instead of having just one volume.
- JoeShmoe
Re:But I wanted a Pedabyte file server... (Score:1)
Nope....apparently M$ is predicting a 1 petabyte footprint for the next version of Windows.
On a sidenote, M$ has just announced it's new IIS freebies [bbspot.com]
----------------------------
Re:Machrone's Law? (Score:1)
Imagine if you could still use an 8088-based IBM PC.
Re:Sounds reasonable (Score:1)
Speak for yourself.
Re:That's alot of space (for MP3s of course!) (Score:1)
Thank you, I'm done.
NT (Score:1)
Re:NT (Score:1)
That soggy popping sound you hear... (Score:1)
Re:Not to rain on their parade (Score:1)
Been there Done that... (Score:1)
Re:I have a better idea... (Score:1)
A carousel that holds 200-300 CDs or DVDs (just like they have for home theaters for around $800)
Sort of like the stuff PowerFile makes. (http://www.dvdchanger.com)
Add to it room for at least two slot-load drives (although four would be even better, one in each corner) so you can access at least two CDs at any given time.
Throw in a Linux thinserver (like the stuff Linksys or any number of companies use) to manange the contents of each CD/DVD.
Result? Over 1TB of storage for around $1000. The only catch is that it is not meant for more than a handful of users at a time.
But this would not work for files >~ 700 MB. I am sure that the SDSC simulations generate individual files that are a few GB in size (this is very common with simulations).
Re:I have a better idea... (Score:1)
Actually, the original poster refers to using ordinary CDs, which would have a smaller filesize limit. In any case, 5 GB is still a constraint the first time you try to create a file larger than this. This is a requirement for some of us.
Re:ext2 vs reiser vs raid5 vs JBOD (Score:1)
Re:Machrone's Law? (Score:1)
I believe this to be true. My current machine, and the one before it, both cost that much. Laptops are just too darn expensive!!!
Mind you that's $5000 Cdn, so that's what? $2500 US?
On Crack, Are You?? (Score:1)
Re:I have a better idea... (Score:1)
===
Re:Backups are inherently cheap, as well (Score:1)
There's a company called Solid Data which does file servers based off of RAM chips for main storage, with an optional hard drive periodic snapshot mirror. They learned the hard way that they had to periodically and automatically spin up the drives, because after about a year of solid operation, they had a failure on one server and it wasn't able to snapshot the data out before the data was lost, because the drives couldn't spin up.
The hard drives are a cheap high performance backup, but they apparently don't do well on a long term shelf. Does anyone here have more info on that phenomenon?
This type of suggestion ( http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=01/07/19/15542 16&cid=48 [slashdot.org]) is my favorite so far. I've been waiting for that for a long time! I don't like tapes!
===
Re:Speed? (Score:1)
Re:This poses an interesting question... (Score:1)
Re:Backups are inherently cheap, as well (Score:1)
Backups involve more than just having a redundant copy of the data in case of a drive (or a few drives) failing. Offsite storage and archiving are just as important - and while you could do this with the "build a second array for backup" approach, it's not really practical to move these heavy boxes around on a daily or weekly basis.
Re:Machrone's Law? (Score:1)
Could be -- my subscription ran out a quite a while ago.. Why slog through John Dvorak's column when I can just hit 'reload' on Slashdot??
Re:Machrone's Law? (Score:1)
Man, $5000?! What kind of car are you trying to buy, a Gremlin?? My four year old Civic cost me $10k!
Re:Machrone's Law? (Score:1)
Somewhere close to that -- last time I was up in Canada, $1 US got you $1.45 Canadian. Playing the slot machines at Niagra Falls was GREAT because $20 US got you $29 Canadian. Sweeeeeet. Cashing out your "big winnings" sucked, though.
Geez, it must be Friday - I've got my mindless rambling bit permanently OR'd on.
Machrone's Law? (Score:5)
"The computer you want always costs $5000".
Mirror (Score:1)
http://whatever.ii.net/mirrors/terafile.html [ii.net]
Re:Slashdotted too (Score:1)
It's still up.
Re:Machrone's Law? (Score:1)
Re:Machrone's Law? (Score:1)
There was a space imbedded in the last link given...
Re:Speed? (Score:1)
How about... (Score:4)
Re:Speed? (Score:1)
The Qu+xum has spoken. Nyaaah!
Re:Speed? (Score:5)
Key parts, both hardware & software:
We went this way because of the nature of the files to be stored (mean size=120MB, many over 200MB), and their purpose (download once, read a few times, delete.)
NFS read times are around 20-25 MB/sec, just fine for us.
A few points:
The Qu+xum has spoken. Nyaaah!
no libraries. (Score:1)
unfortunately, we wont have our own libraries, because all information will be via encrypted subscription services :(
cache, anyone? (Score:2)
This is from a ucsd "Active Web Equipment Infrastructure Plan" page. [ucsd.edu]. Found by google-ing "terabyte web server SDSC" [google.com] (since I couldn't find a google cache on michael's URL, but he says SDSC did it).
If anyone managed to snatch a copy of the original before we went down, that, of course would be ideal. Mirror, mirror, anyone?
Normal people, ignore below.
-----
"These are for the goat-weary:" (Though I don't know why people do this -- any decent web browser displays somewhere the target of a link before you click it. These people can viewsource and copy the format of my post for doing this, and stop cluttering your message body with plaintext URL's!)
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=01/07/19/1554
http://www-cse.ucsd.edu/Department/ActiveWeb/Back
http://www.google.com/search?q=terabyte+web+serve
~
Re:But I wanted a Pedabyte file server... (Score:2)
We need all the disk space we can get for our spell checkers now that there are so many new words in the english language [cnn.com].
--
But I wanted a Pedabyte file server... (Score:3)
On the bright size, this machine just MIGHT have enough disk space to allow us to install thenext release of Windows (after XP).
Oh, wait, maybe it won't matter because by that point Windows will be a remotely hosted subscription service.
--
Re:Not to rain on their parade (Score:2)
3 Hotrod ATA/100 controllers ($180)
Powered enclosure ($200)
Custom extra-long IDE cables ($150)
A geek who can put it all together (priceless)
----------
Re:Backups ? (Score:2)
pr0n? Sheesh. mp3! (Score:3)
Re:Backups ? (Score:3)
Re:Backups ? (Score:3)
It was sort of funny dealing with them on the tour of the facility. They wanted to know how long our cooling would last if someone threw a satchel charge over our fence and took out the cooling towers. They also didn't want to host in two centers on the same coast, regardless of distance, in case a hurricane came along and took both out.
Re:This poses an interesting question... (Score:3)
I have 5 gigs of music myself, non-repeating (it isn't too hard to find, actually). However, here's the real hard drive killer: video.
I'm into anime (yahoo), and my full/almost full collections of Ranma (TV Seasons 1 - 5 + OAV), Tenchi, O!MG, Lodoss, Evangelion, Lain, and the like are currently killing my 40 gig hard drive. Some of the full length movies (fan-dubbed) can run to half a gig alone. That will quickly kill alot of hard drives.
OTOH, I'm seriously considering 3 40/80 gig hard drives and IDE RAID 5 for my next system. :)
Re:SDSC != Netapp (Score:3)
Sure, you can get just as much disk space for an order of magnitude less. But you won't get their reliability, or their feature set. We use them exclusively for our storage needs. We have about 8TB of space on them right now. At anytime we can retrieve a recently deleted file or directory, do hot bakups, make new containers on the fly, hot swap out bad drives, add a new shelf of drives, chew gum and walk.
In a production environment, where the data on those servers is the lifeblood of your company/organization, some DIY IDE RAID setup will not withstand the demands, or come close to yielding the results of a NetApp (or EMC, or Xiotech, or Compaq, etc..)
These IDE RAID setups are fine for your mp3's or your personal or small workgroup fileservers. Just don't bet the farm on them.
Speed? (Score:3)
Re:Terabyte? (Score:3)
This poses an interesting question... (Score:2)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What you could do with a 1 Terabyte server (Score:3)
16700 Full length MP3 albums
1430 Divx dvdrip movies with surround sound
700 Divx dvdrip movies with AC3 sound
200 DVD movies
A Guy with a T3 and 1 Terabyte fileserver could replace a fullsize videostore or even a library. Then again he could even have a radio station that would broadcast non-stop music for 2 years and none of the songs would be played twice.
Funny how the world turns around when technology advances. Few years from now and that server costs only 1000$. Then we all have our own videostores and libraries.. I wonder what happens to those public ones, that have been so popular till now.
Backups ? (Score:3)
It's like proclaiming /dev/null as my trillion-terabyte disk array.
Slashdotted? (Score:5)