SATA RAID Enclosure w/ Temperature Monitoring? 91
vanyel asks: "Yesterday, my external USB 2.0 drive enclosure finished cooking a 3/4 full 200G drive after its fan quit working who knows how long ago. In the time honored tradition of closing the barn door *after* the horse has wandered away, I'm accelerating my quest for a RAID solution. In particular, I want something that will support 4 SATA drives and has temperature monitoring that doesn't require a particular vendor's RAID card or Windows. Better yet, is there a RAID-5 NAS that isn't in the $4-5000USD price range. Anyone with a better barn door to close this problem with?"
Use SMART? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Use SMART? (Score:3, Informative)
For other computer parts lsensor might do the trick.
For exemple: http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_Monitor_your_hard_di s k(s)_with_smartmontools [gentoo-wiki.com]
if it's an external device, the best thing would be to get a controlable UPS And turn off (again with a small script)
Just think RAID, UPS [apcc.com], smart monitors [santools.com] and deamons [apcupsd.com] and with a bit of imagination, you can come up with a
Re:Use SMART? (Score:1)
Re:read your logs... (Score:1)
Re:Use SMART? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Use SMART? (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes you do. Its no big deal at least for operating systems that log in plaintext (I don't know about windows). What I do is nightly grep for unusual stuff and I take 30seconds to a minute reviewing it for all of my systems and I admin about a hundred, so one machine should take about 5 seconds or so a day. That is much easier than trying to recreate 250 Gigs of data from a dead drive. Right?
Re:Use SMART? (Score:2)
When I figured that one out the hard way was also the exact moment I decided to convert from Windows on the servers to Linux. Real servers log plain-text.
Re:Use SMART? (Score:2)
Finally, a
Ragnarok is coming!
Re:Use SMART? (Score:2)
Really? Do you claim C:\WINNT\security\edb.log is plain text just because it doesn't contain any Unicode characters? C:\WINNT\system32\LogFiles would be a nice place for the logs, but it only contains the IIS logfiles. C:\WINNT\Debug has a few other logfiles, but nothing consistent and no system.log like you'll see in the Event Viewer.
OK, I'll end the suspense. The system log is at C:\WINNT\system32\config\SysEvent.Evt . First place to look for a log file that is, the co
Re:Use SMART? (Score:2)
Next bet?
(um, it's not EASY to read it in notepad, thats not the tool I would use by choice, as it's not formatted to be read in notepad).
I used to keep tabs on a 70 sub-office WAN network by occasional checking the event logs.
Re:Use SMART? (Score:2)
Now, let's see what Slashcode does to this snippet from my logfile (actually, one of my customer's):
Re:Use SMART? (Score:2)
0 LfLe À DÀ ÛV L : 0 _ _ P R I N T S E R V E R _ P 1 / L J U S D A L / S e s s i o n 7
Re:Use SMART? (Score:2)
E v e n t L o g S H A D O W 1 4 : 3 6 : 0 4 P M 1 2 / 1 4 / 2 0 0 4 Ô $ mÔ $ m LfLe bAbAy
Maybe you aren't opening the right file? I had to take out enough to get by the junk filter, but aside from some non-standard characters and spacing between letters, it's completely readable.
it's SysEvent.Evt; there are other system files there, and if you have your file extensions turned off (shudder) it's easy to click on the wrong one.
Re:Use SMART? (Score:2)
aside from some non-standard characters and spacing between letters, it's completely readable.
So, can you tell me what is actually says in your example, apart from the datestamp? What does a disk read error look like, for example? That's the one I would have wanted to know about before going home for the weekend while the server happily thrashed a few hundre
Re:Use SMART? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Use SMART? (Score:2, Informative)
obObvious comment (Score:2)
What's worked for me is... (Score:2)
MTW
Re:What's worked for me is... (Score:1)
Re:What's worked for me is... (Score:1)
What the market completely misses is a easy and comfortable storage solution for the SOHO or advanced home user at a reasonable price. Not those stupidly small 1 or 2 drive boxes that cost even more than a complete PC including a drive of that size, and not those absolutely insane-priced "profe
freebsd and vinum (to avoid the card) (Score:2)
I just recently setup a vinum test for freebsd. I ganged 4 200gig drives and got this:
(sorry for lameness in formatting. LIT doesn't work on slash...)
(yes, 4*200=800 yet its really only 734)
anyway, what's neat is that I used a variety of controllers and it all worked. I first started off with a $15 ide controller and 4 ports (2 channels m/s). used SiL chipset. worked fi
Re:freebsd and vinum (to avoid the card) (Score:2)
losing a single 200GB disk in that setup means that you most likely say goodbye to 734GB of data, rather than giving said disk a proper burial and replacing it.
Re:freebsd and vinum (to avoid the card) (Score:2)
for my data pack, I use concat (linear) mode. its not striping since it doesn't paint across all disks for each next block. it fills up one disk at a time, then moves on to the next. if I stay within that disk, no others need be accessed. this allows the mobo to spin the others down and save heat, power and life of the drive.
but what if one of those fails? it will probably bring the whole pack down, like you say.
in that case
Re:freebsd and vinum (to avoid the card) (Score:2)
forgot to mention: the main reason I went with software raid for the data-pack is that its GROWABLE non-destructively. I asked 3ware and some others (highpoint, promise) if their controllers supported how disk-adds to add more storage to a pack. none had it. that really surprised me.
I didn't want to be a slave to any one vendor for my almost-terabyte media collection. if I need to grow this array (and I will, periodically) then freebsd vinum on 4.10-stable seemed to be th
Raidcore is growable (Score:2)
Re:Raidcore is growable (Score:2)
one of the things that impressed me about 3ware was that there are kernel drivers that are production quality. seriously.
I am always interested in good hardware, but it MUST be freebsd-solid. else, its usually a good comment on how poor the hardware is, or how closed the drivers are.
finally, since I've never come across that brand before (and I'm not so junior in pc's, raid, etc) - then I do worry if I got one of these controllers - how long they'll be around and how e
Re:Raidcore is growable (Score:2)
Q: Do you have plans to support Novell NetWare, FreeBSD, MAC/OSX, or other OS's?
A: The BC4000 Series SATA RAID Controllers currently support various Windows versions and several Linux versions. Support for other operating systems is planned but not yet scheduled. Any information you wish to provide regarding other operating system needs, the criticality and the timeframe, would be welcome.
BEEP! wrong answer. no bsd drivers.
3ware has 'em.
I have no idea why there's no bsd driver
Re:freebsd and vinum (to avoid the card) (Score:2)
You might consider RAID-5 for the physical disks in the data pack with concat on top of that (if it's possible). Then you have hot-swappable redundant data storage that you can grow as you please (albeit 3+ disks at a time). Still hybrid, but trading some space for better availability. Done this way (if it's even possible), dropping a physical disk won't kill your
Re:freebsd and vinum (to avoid the card) (Score:2)
for storage that DOES grow (my media/music collection) growability is prime. rebuilding is NOT an option just to add more logical space.
it seemed that going vinum (or gvinum for bsd5) is the right logical layering.
and its nice to isolate dealing with failed spindles and dealing with growing space. my space problem is solved by vinum. the spindle problem is solved by having backups via friends. no, its
Re:freebsd and vinum (to avoid the card) (Score:2)
gmirror and gstripe are also well worth looking at.
my enclosures do not have fans... (Score:1, Flamebait)
Re:my enclosures do not have fans... (Score:2)
not only is it faster (and lately, quieter) but you don't worry about spindle locking (seizing) or crashes - but you also can rest easier.
rule: if you can re-download it, don't worry.
if you write it yourself, BACK IT UP on multiple brands/types of drives.
Re:my enclosures do not have fans... (Score:2)
And for an additional $30, you can turn the old drives into a portable USB drive. Each month, grab one and copy all of your important stuff to it. Then, tote it over to a friend's house for safekeeping. Then, even if your house burns down, you still have all of your old data, not more than a month out of date, for only an additional $30.
For best results, use two separate USB drives, and do not have both in your house at the same time. It would suck i
Re:my enclosures do not have fans... (Score:2)
fw still seems more robust and reliable. not sure why, but it is.
oxford 911 chipset is your friend.
then again, serial-ata is becoming an EXTERNAL standard and so that's even better than fw or usb2.
3ware (Score:1)
Re:3ware (Score:2)
works great - BUT - one big big catch. no online extends!
I had 2 drives in concat raid (striped) and wanted to add more storage. NO WAY TO DO IT unless you tear it down, break it down and totally rebuild. which means I have to move that data OFF the pack and then reformat the new pack (new drives added) then copy back.
sucks!!!
for a hardware card that costs a lot - its sucks in terms of online extends.
for mirroring, its
Re:3ware (Score:2)
Re:3ware (Score:2)
they said no, but it is being worked on.
JUST being worked on NOW?? wow...
my ancient mylex card (long format pci, scsi) could extend, I'm pretty sure.
but things are not as advanced in ide-raid, it appears. even from the 'big guys'.
Buy a heat alarm for $10 (Score:1, Informative)
PCPowerCooling.com sells an overheating alarm for $10. I put it in all the systems I build.
Alarm Available Here [pcpowercooling.com]
Re:Buy a heat alarm for $10 (Score:2)
I just found it funny to see the picture demonstrating the device in a computer that needs no special CPU cooling.
-Adam
Re:Buy a heat alarm for $10 (Score:2)
The original poster should just spend the $12k and get an Apple XServe.
Re:Buy a heat alarm for $10 (Score:2)
not all that hard, really. I bet a dvm to do that might be $50 or less.
if you have an older mobo (old asus boards, before the built-in temp probes for cpus) had these 2 pin headers where you could plug in a thermister and fit it near the cpu to get the reading. that reading could be
Avoid RAID5 (Score:3, Interesting)
There is really only one good reason to ever use RAID5, and that is that you're too tight on money to be able to afford to RAID1 (Mirror) the storage you need (If you need 400G of space, RAID1 is gonna cost you 800G of storage, whereas RAID5 might only cost you 500G of storage). RAID1 is both faster (For writes and especially reads) and more resilient than RAID5. Assuming you can afford it (and storage itself is pretty cheap today, especially if you don't get a fancy RAID5 controller), just go with RAID1.
If you want really nice performance and you're buying 4+ drives, do RAID1+0 - mirror the drives up in pairs (where the pairs are as diverse as your setup allows, seperate controllers and/or chassis and/or power, etc...), then stripe the data volume on top of the sets of mirror-pairs.
Re:Avoid RAID5 (Score:2)
but sometimes you HAVE little choice. if you have massive storage, you can't very easily full mirror it.
what if your case is already filled with drives? what if your power supply can't handle 2x the drives?
raid 5 is fine. slower, but not a bad setup if your controller does xor in hw.
Re:Avoid RAID5 (Score:1, Insightful)
Until you have two drives fail. Then, you're fucked. Don't act like that never happens, because it does. I've had it happen, as I'm sure others have. No more RAID5 for me. . .
Re:Avoid RAID5 (Score:3, Informative)
no array is ever completely fault tolerant.
you STILL need backups.
but raid helps get you buy during the 3am disk failure and you don't want to drive 50miles to replace a failed disk.
in the AM, when you get to work, THEN you replace it.
raid is not subs. for backups. but it helps get you thru the single spindle failures.
its better than NOT having it.
Re:Avoid RAID5 (Score:3, Insightful)
you STILL need backups.
I'm not sure what the target use is, but it seems like its personal, and being that the previous external drive was only USB, performance does not seem to be a concern.
With that in mind, I would suggest poor man's RAID1 over real RAID1. By that I mean buy two disks and cron a rsync command every night. This would take care of backups and redundancy, although its not realtime, so a disk failure after a disk write but before the rsync wou
Re:Avoid RAID5 (Score:2)
Depends on the controller. If it supports parallel reads/writes it can be the fastest of all RAID configurations. (Otherwise it's the slowest
P - Until you have two drives fail.
Well duh! That's true of any RAID solution. And while it does happen occasionally, I can say that it's pretty goddamn rare! I've been consulting for over ten years and out of many thousands of RAID configurations across numerous controllers/drives/etc I have seen exactly one case of honest-t
Re:Avoid RAID5 (Score:2)
Well duh! That's true of any RAID solution."
Really? I kinda hope that if I have two drives fail on my 3 drive RAID-1, the array's not going to mysteriously disappear.. and I'd hope my RAID-10's can survive at least some combinations of multiple drive failure
Re:Avoid RAID5 (Score:2)
Fweeky - "Really?"
True enough, maybe I should have been a little less emphatic, eh?
Out of curiousity, (not argument), since there are no "standard" RAID definitions above Raid-5, which particular manufacturer's RAID-10 were you referring to?
Re:Avoid RAID5 (Score:1)
Re:Avoid RAID5 (Score:2)
RAID5 is always going to be slowest of the "common" RAIDs (0,1,5) for disk writes (discounting seriously broken hardware and/or software) simply by virtue of the way it works.
RAID5 reads should be as fast as anything else.
Re:Avoid RAID5 (Score:3, Insightful)
Thats what hot spares are for. Even if you aren't monitoring your arrays.. you are aren't you? One global hot spare per enclosure and you need 3 failed drives before you loose data.
Re:Avoid RAID5 (Score:2)
The RAID5 slowdown has nothing to do with parity calculations (not these days, anyway).
Re:Avoid RAID5 (Score:2)
Well, if you're going to be accessing the data in such a way that RAID5's dismal write performance isn't an issue (eg: 90% reads, over a 100Mb network, etc) then RAID5 is by _far_ the better bang/$ solution.
Re:Avoid RAID5 (Score:2)
If you've a proper controller and a sensible number of drives, RAID 5 is by far the fastest in reading. Try getting a sustained 400MB/s out of RAID 1 and get back to me.
Re:Avoid RAID5 (Score:2)
First off, (Score:2)
I've got the teeth marks to prove it.
Re:First off, (Score:2)
For a lot of data this seems a bit redundant IMHO. There is a difference between data you can recreate but don't want to loose (ripped CDs etc) and data you can't recreate (documents, photos). Depending on your storage needs it may be redundant to put it all on the same type of array.
Re:First off, (Score:2)
Between
AB (AB)' (striped first)
which is the same as
AB A'B' (striped first)
vs
A A' B B' (mirrored first)
(' = mirror)
Whether you have RAID0 first or RAID1 first. As long as two As or two Bs don't fail you're OK.
In practice I suppose it's better to have the mirrors in physically different bay areas and attached to different controllers (some RAID controllers seem to have a nasty habit of failing before the drives fail).
Re:First off, (Score:2)
If you first stripe and then mirror and one drive fails you have one partially failed subarray and one fully working subarray. If one of the drives in the fully working subarray fail the entire array fails as that subarray has the only working copy of the array. If the still working drive in
Why RAID 1+0 is safer than RAID 0+1 (Score:4, Interesting)
Here's a clear and concise explanation, with pictures. [ofb.net]
With a striped pair of mirrors, a total failure happens only if both drives in one of the mirrors fail; there are two ways this can happen.
With a mirrored pair of stripes, a total failure happens whenever any two drives in different stripes fail; there are four ways this can happen.
In both cases, there are (4 2) = 6 pairs of drives that can fail. Given that two drives have failed, there's a 2/6 = 33% chance that the RAID 1+0 will fail, but a 4/6 = 67% chance that the RAID 0+1 will fail.
Re:Why RAID 1+0 is safer than RAID 0+1 (Score:2)
Re:First off, (Score:2)
If you stripe then mirror, then losing a single drive makes your entire array non-redundant, effectively turning it into a RAID0 (and greatly increases your rebuild time when you replace the failed disk as half of the entire array needs to be rebuilt). To lose the entire array in this scenario you only need to lose a single disk from the other side of the mirror.
OTOH, if you mirror then stripe, then losing a single disk only affects a fraction
Supermicro has something that'll work (Score:2, Interesting)
I got mine from http://www.newegg.com/ [newegg.com] for around $150 when you get shipping and tax involved, and they work good.
roll your own! (Score:1)
Complete this with board, cpu and all the rest fitting your needs and you'll have the most S-ATA fileserver you'll get for your money!
I just do the same for me, except the fan/temp controller.
Call me Mr Pedant, but... (Score:1, Funny)
Horses live in stables, not barns AFAIK, so it would make more sense.
Re:Call me Mr Pedant, but... (Score:1)
Re:Call me Mr Pedant, but... (Score:2)
So, 'close the barn door when the cows have bolted'? Must be an American thing...
Re:Call me Mr Pedant, but... (Score:2)
Many fans are fixable (Score:2)
Once you've ignored one noisy fan bearing and lost hardware and/or system reliability as a result, you become pretty good at picking the
For the do it yourself type with a limited budget (Score:1)
Just need to get an old drive enclosure some where (ebay?)
It could even run the drive health scripts itself....
Typical Slashdot (Score:3)
Which really disappoints me as I will soon run out of room in my PowerMac with my extra drive bracket.
Is it just me or is Slashdot becoming exponentially more useless?
Re:Typical Slashdot (Score:2)
Re:Typical Slashdot (Score:2)
Check out macgurus.com [macgurus.com]. They have some good solutions that seem pretty inexpensive.
Re:Typical Slashdot (Score:2)
Plus: It's in my price range, It's in my size range.
Minus : That whole external wiring thing (I have one of those water cooled PowerMacs and they don't like having holes in them), I don't think they ship to the EU, also it seems like a hack
But hey what can I expect for the money! So I'll probably wind up with a variation of this
Re:Typical Slashdot (Score:2)
Meanwhile, one click at the macgurus website gave me this:
"International orders are shipped Fedex International Priority or UPS Worldwi
only one place you need to go (Score:1)
here is the exact link for what you want:
http://www.rackmountpro.com/productpage.php?pro
Hall Effect Fans (Score:2)
My Setup (Score:1)
I also have the RAID on the motherboard, but it does not support hot swap.
Running FreeBSD, I have Samba, NFS, and Appletalk, BIND9, Apache (for some testing), Postfix (for relaying the mail), and other goodies.
Some ready to go hardware choices (Score:2)
We ended up with a server like these rackmounts [ioncomputer.com], with 24 hot swap drive bays, Windows 200 server license, 4 hot swap power supplies (3 live, one redundant), tw
Here you go... (Score:2)
USB 2.0 and FireWire or External SATA connection for 4 drives in raid 0,1,1+0 or 5 set ups.