Cheaper File Server Challenge

[Windows7ge]

@ChalkChalkson I was using the word "insurances" as a broad term including all of the additional services that come with the purchasing of these servers. For larger companies the cost can be justified but for smaller businesses who often don't utilizes the insurances anyways the cost to performance isn't cost effective. My argument is very circumstantial but people should know their's alternative options besides following what everybody else does. Like my example in my original post. My uncles company dropping $1,000 on a 1TB server of which I can verify they never utilized any additional services that came with the system. In this event they would have been better off building their own. They would have gotten more performance, been able to utilize hardware of their choosing, and cost them less.

[Electronics Wizardy]

21 hours ago, Windows7ge said:

@domandric034 @WMGroomAK

The purpose of the Thread is just to bring awareness as to how much cheaper and better a server can be built when built yourself. I myself have built my own home server for astronomically less than what any company would charge me and I'm working with my cousin to get my Uncle to let us upgrade the business server more appropriately and cost effectively. Assistance with that project isn't necessary.

the thing is your not getting support. with dell and others your getting same day on site support, you not getting that without spending a lot on a it dept.

 

your also getting much better support for software like esxi. some comapnys won't support there software at all unless your running on a approved hardware.

 

upgrades and repairs are much easier. none of these servers have hotswap psus, hot swap fans, completly tool less designs. on those dells you can change every part including the motherboard without any tools.

 

your also have to rember in a buiness building costs money. your paying the person for their time to build it and spec it.

 

also downtime is money and those premade systems normally have less downtime, esp if they have premade software for them. 

[Electronics Wizardy]

12 hours ago, Windows7ge said:

I use to have some decent software that backed it up for me but it was only a 30 day free trial and I'm not willing to spend money on software when that's the only function I'm using it for. It did work nicely though. I think I set it for every 24 hours it'd compare my RAID0 array to my RAID5 file server then copy file to the RAID5 accordingly. Deleting files off the RAID5 if I removed them from the RAID0 though I don't think it did.

time to learn scripting.

[Windows7ge]

1 hour ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

the thing is your not getting support. with dell and others your getting same day on site support, you not getting that without spending a lot on a it dept.

 

your also getting much better support for software like esxi. some comapnys won't support there software at all unless your running on a approved hardware.

 

upgrades and repairs are much easier. none of these servers have hotswap psus, hot swap fans, completly tool less designs. on those dells you can change every part including the motherboard without any tools.

 

your also have to rember in a buiness building costs money. your paying the person for their time to build it and spec it.

 

also downtime is money and those premade systems normally have less downtime, esp if they have premade software for them. 

I agree with some of your arguments but circumstantially the support that is available isn't utilized by the consumer. Not to mention if you're a home gamer looking for a file server and a typical store bought NAS isn't sufficient then you could build something better with more customization options than what Dell or HP will offer. Not to mention Dell server motherboards often don't follow a standard form factor meaning if you want to upgrade you can't use the same case or you can't upgrade the case itself. Maybe you want quieter fans due to your environment well you can't the fans aren't desktop standard. If you want redundant PSU's you can use a 2U or 4U rack mount chassis and buy an appropriate redundant PSU you're not limited to a prebuilt server for redundant power. The argument I'm making is very circumstantial and not for everyone I'm just trying to say that not everyone needs to fork over a premium amount of money for limited options and support features they may not even utilize.

1 hour ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

time to learn scripting.

I've been playing with scripting just a little bit. I just finished writing a small script that gives me general information as to the read/write performance of my servers 3 drive RAID5 so I can compare it to the future 8 drive RAID6. I haven't the slightest idea how I'd write a script that would connect to my PC over the network and compare all the files then copy or delete files accordingly to the backup share to keep it up to date.

[Electronics Wizardy]

45 minutes ago, Windows7ge said:

I agree with some of your arguments but circumstantially the support that is available isn't utilized by the consumer. Not to mention if you're a home gamer looking for a file server and a typical store bought NAS isn't sufficient then you could build something better with more customization options than what Dell or HP will offer. Not to mention Dell server motherboards often don't follow a standard form factor meaning if you want to upgrade you can't use the same case or you can't upgrade the case itself. Maybe you want quieter fans due to your environment well you can't the fans aren't desktop standard. If you want redundant PSU's you can use a 2U or 4U rack mount chassis and buy an appropriate redundant PSU you're not limited to a prebuilt server for redundant power. The argument I'm making is very circumstantial and not for everyone I'm just trying to say that not everyone needs to fork over a premium amount of money for limited options and support features they may not even utilize.

I've been playing with scripting just a little bit. I just finished writing a small script that gives me general information as to the read/write performance of my servers 3 drive RAID5 so I can compare it to the future 8 drive RAID6. I haven't the slightest idea how I'd write a script that would connect to my PC over the network and compare all the files then copy or delete files accordingly to the backup share to keep it up to date.

For scripting file syncs look at rsync. It will only copy files that have changed and with a few examples on line you can easily have it put changes into a different folder. 

[Windows7ge]

17 minutes ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

For scripting file syncs look at rsync. It will only copy files that have changed and with a few examples on line you can easily have it put changes into a different folder. 

My server runs FreeNAS and seems to have a menu option labeled "Rsync Task". My network isn't on any kind of domain so I'm not sure how I'd allow the server access to my desktop RAID to compare it to its own RAID for what differences their are. I'll look into it though. It must be possible and will save me the trouble of doing it manually.

[Electronics Wizardy]

6 minutes ago, Windows7ge said:

My server runs FreeNAS and seems to have a menu option labeled "Rsync Task". My network isn't on any kind of domain so I'm not sure how I'd allow the server access to my desktop RAID to compare it to its own RAID for what differences their are. I'll look into it though. It must be possible and will save me the trouble of doing it manually.

I'd run rsync on your desktop to sync the server and your local drives. 

[Windows7ge]

7 minutes ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

I'd run rsync on your desktop to sync the server and your local drives. 

That'd be easier to do since I was able to setup the server as a network drive with a drive letter.

I have a slight issue though. It seems Rsync is for Linux. My primary desktop is windows (though I did install Ubuntu on my laptop).

A little bit of research has led me to a program called Cygwin. Does this sound familiar to you? Is it an appropriate substitute?

[Electronics Wizardy]

1 minute ago, Windows7ge said:

That'd be easier to do since I was able to setup the server as a network drive with a drive letter.

I have a slight issue though. It seems Rsync is for Linux. My primary desktop is windows (though I did install Ubuntu on my laptop).

A little bit of research has led me to a program called Cygwin. Does this sound familiar to you? Is it an appropriate substitute?

Well it might work with bash on Windows. 

 

 

I'd also look at free file sync. 

[Windows7ge]

11 minutes ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

Well it might work with bash on Windows. 

 

 

I'd also look at free file sync. 

Some tutorials also brought me to bash in CMD but I don't like Microsoft changing my computer without permission from me so I disabled updates (Yes I know it's not recommended) due to this my CMD is not up to date enough to support bash. My CMD version is V10.0.10240

 

I'll check that out now.

 

Not so much scripting or writing batch files but my college forced me to take at least one programming class for my major and the one random class I ended up taking got me somewhat interested in programming. I like the amount of freedom that comes with it and how virtually anything is possible if you know how to code it.

[Windows7ge]

1 hour ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

I'd also look at free file sync. 

Took me a little while to figure out but now that I understand the basics of it it's a decent little program. Thanks.

[Unhelpful]

On 5/23/2017 at 2:54 PM, Windows7ge said:

I understand the asking price of these companies come with insurances but I think they're bull. If you can build and setup a file server yourself then you can troubleshoot why something stopped working.

Once you actually get in the professional space you'll realize that this statement is completely insane. But this is true for the smallest of small shops.

[Windows7ge]

4 minutes ago, JoeyDM said:

Once you actually get in the professional space you'll realize that this statement is completely insane. But this is true for the smallest of small shops.

That's true. I'm looking out for the little people. Writing a large post like that it's easy for me to leave out fine details like what group of people I'm referring to are getting screwed in the pricing.

[Unhelpful]

Just now, Windows7ge said:

That's true. I'm looking out for the little people. Writing a large post like that it's easy for me to leave out fine details like what group of people I'm referring to are getting screwed in the pricing.

On a person-by-person basis where $300 is a lot, I 100% agree with you. 

[Windows7ge]

23 hours ago, leadeater said:

If I see anything based around an ASRock/Asus etc motherboard that is an instant step down in my opinion as those really aren't server motherboards and have issues with RAID cards and network cards.

When I started planning for the dual socket server I was looking at Supermicro boards but I ended up going with ASRock because I had previously purchased one of their C2750D4I motherboards and was familiar with how their IPMI worked so I wanted to stick with what I knew. When the day comes (long way off) that I bump the server up to socket 2011-V3 I may try out a Supermicro board.

 

While I'm at it. Is their IPMI user friendly like a WebUI or GUI? Or will I have to learn how to navigate a command line console?

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, Windows7ge said:

While I'm at it. Is their IPMI user friendly like a WebUI or GUI? Or will I have to learn how to navigate a command line console?

IPMI is usually exactly the same across all servers that use it, if it's been changed it'll be marketed under a different name i.e. HPE iLO or Dell iDRAC.

[Windows7ge]

43 minutes ago, leadeater said:

IPMI is usually exactly the same across all servers that use it, if it's been changed it'll be marketed under a different name i.e. HPE iLO or Dell iDRAC.

That's good to know. I like the WebUI with the option to remote console (or desktop) the system. Its helped me a few times when I wasn't home and the server was off or booted into a different OS and I needed to enter the BIOS to either change the boot order or select the boot disk from the boot menu (typically F10 but ASRock wants to be special and made it F11)

[AshleyAshes]

On 5/23/2017 at 2:54 PM, Windows7ge said:

Here's my contribution:

Dell wants $679 for a PowerEdge T330 Tower Server

Specifications:

Intel Celeron G3900

4GB 2400MHz DDR4 UDIMM ECC Memory

500GB SATAIII 3.5" 7200RPM hard drive

350W Non-redundant PSU

(cost includes some services warranties with no option to opt out)

 

I could build a better server for: $587.75

Case: RAIJINTEK ARCADIA WHITE

Storage: WD Gold 2TB 7200RPM (4x the storage)

PSU: CORSAIR CX-M Series CX550M 550W 80 PLUS BRONZE (200W more power for drives or accesories)

Motherboard: ASRock C236 WS

RAM: 1x 8GB stick DDR4 2400MHz Unbuffered ECC memory (2x the RAM)

CPU: Intel Celeron G3900 (To swamp it with a Intel Xeon E3-1220 V5 4C/4T would bring total cost to $749.93)

CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO (better cooler than stock)

OS: FreeNAS (Costs $0)

Your build lacks iDRAC or any of the build in hardware for remote management.  It doesn't support dual redundant PSUs where as the T330 is capable of this. Also your build can't be racked where as a T330 can slap on some Ready Rails and take up 5U despite being a tower.

 

You seem to be trying to make this about basic raw specs while ignoring a lot of features that can be critical to server operations.  Certainly not EVERYONE will need iDRAC when they may just run the thing like a desktop, but Dell server's have these functions because it's something their class of customers frequently look for.  By negating a lot of these functions you're turning this into an Apples to Oranges comparison while declaring that your Orange is the superior Apple...

[Windows7ge]

18 minutes ago, AshleyAshes said:

Your build lacks iDRAC or any of the build in hardware for remote management.  It doesn't support dual redundant PSUs where as the T330 is capable of this. Also your build can't be racked where as a T330 can slap on some Ready Rails and take up 5U despite being a tower.

 

You seem to be trying to make this about basic raw specs while ignoring a lot of features that can be critical to server operations.  Certainly not EVERYONE will need iDRAC when they may just run the thing like a desktop, but Dell server's have these functions because it's something their class of customers frequently look for.  By negating a lot of these functions you're turning this into an Apples to Oranges comparison while declaring that your Orange is the superior Apple...

You're right, I forgot to verify that the motherboard supported IPMI before using it in my list. I argue that the Cheap case I selected could be substituted with a 4U server chassis which would support redundant PSU's easily.

 

If you read through the 3 pages of this thread you'll see me explain how not all businesses utilize the features and functions included with a pre-built server. I'm not boasting that every business should build their own but for some who just need a file server that works it's a valid cheaper solution. If it needs rack mounting and redundant power it can be adapted to provide that. If it needs IPMI functionality then a different motherboard can be used. I do agree with your counter-argument which is why what I'm preaching isn't for everyone but not everybody uses the additional services that come with a Dell or HP server which means they're paying a premium for nothing.

[NZLaurence]

From a personal view I have acquired from working with both small and large businesses this thread is crazy.

 

When I was working for a larger business we didn't worry about the warranties(insurances as you call it) on the server nodes we deployed because we had enough that we could lose a few servers and not have any noticeable impact into the environment. The money saved by not adding the extra warranties to the servers brought extra servers. We were buying bare-bone intel/supermicro/cisco servers and then off the shelf SSD's/RAM and CPU's. This ended up costing as about the same as building them ourselves with generic parts (Which is really what the Intel servers are anyway). They all came with return to base warranties that were 1-5 years and if something failed someone would head down, pull the faulty part and replace it. The part would be RMA'ed and then kept for a spare when it was returned.

 

If you look at a small business, they might only have 1-2 servers. Sure they have a tighter budget but they also cannot normally handle an outage of up to 5 weeks to get a part replaced (that is how long its taken me to get a western digital hard drive replace before). When you factor the cost of the warranty into a HP tower server you are normally paying 30% more then building it yourself. However when a hard-drive fails HP will send a tech onsite to swap the drive within 4-6 hours. For a small business the cost in technician call out to have their local IT come and replace it ASAP (with a new part) to get them back up and running would likely cost more then that warranty did in the first place.

 

I believe that you need to look a TCO before buying anything IT. The smaller your IT budget the more it matters.

 

Also for most small businesses all they really care about is usable size and backup. Its unlikely that they will be running anything CPU or RAM intensive on their servers, so most grunt for $$$ is normally not the required metric.

[Windows7ge]

@NZLaurence I appreciate the fact you took the time to read some of the thread and share your opposed opinion in a respectful manner unlike others. You bring up valid points that I cannot argue. Though system resources such as RAM and CPU may need to be somewhat powerful depending on the OS. FreeNAS typically likes 1GB per TB of storage though it doesn't need to be DDR4 @ 2400MHz I used that as an example because it's within the budget, it's future proofing and with that it will never be the bottle neck of the system. The CPU for a small company of 20~30 employees hitting the file server all at once you'll want a CPU with multiple threads to meet all the requests (4C/4T or 4C/8T). A company of 1 employee or 5 won't need a CPU that strong I agree.

 

Leadeater and yourself have brought up a very nice compromise that I find I can agree with if warranty services are important to the company. Purchasing a bare bones unit and buying your own RAM/drives/raid cards, etc is a viable alternative. It's something I didn't consider prior to making the thread.

 

Also you're right, this thread turned into quite the clusterf**k. I poked a hornets nest that I though was empty.

[leadeater]

On 5/27/2017 at 3:45 PM, Windows7ge said:

FreeNAS typically likes 1GB per TB of storage though it doesn't need to be DDR4 @ 2400MHz I used that as an example because it's within the budget, it's future proofing and with that it will never be the bottle neck of the system.

Actually you can add the 1GB/TB RAM requirement to the list of extremely popular but untrue myths, you can read more about it below but TL;DR the developers of ZFS tell a very different story.

 

 

[leadeater]

On 5/27/2017 at 3:45 PM, Windows7ge said:

Also you're right, this thread turned into quite the clusterf**k. I poked a hornets nest that I though was empty.

Really want to add in the 'surprise ....... meme' but that would be highly inappropriate lol.

 

But yes a lot of people have very strong opinions on what is classed as server class equipment and what isn't and where it is appropriate to use it, myself included . I really do understand the tight budgets of small businesses but as @NZLaurence pointed out few would be able to survive the return to base warranty of a parts built server.

 

There are actually much cheaper options than the Dell T330 example which are worth looking in to, like HPE Microservers or QNAP/Synology NAS's with upgraded warranty.

https://www.hpe.com/nz/en/product-catalog/servers/proliant-servers/pip.hpe-proliant-microserver-gen8.5379860.html 

[Windows7ge]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

Actually you can add the 1GB/TB RAM requirement to the list of extremely popular but untrue myths, you can read more about it below but TL;DR the developers of ZFS tell a very different story.

Even though I've been telling people the 1GB per TB thing. From actual use experience I always noticed that the RAM usage never actually followed the trend that people recommended. I decided to go overkill and install 128GB of RAM in the server (Just because I like building overkill things) and did a test. 16GB RAM vs 128GB RAM yielded similar results. The system would only use a certain amount and start flushing the data from memory as more was put in. Regardless of how much storage to RAM ratio their was in the system ARC would utilize almost all of it. As seen below. I built the 8x 2TB 16TB raidZ2 and copied 600GB of data to it:

 

I also noticed when I'd copy or read information to/from the array I'd get around 275MB/s but if I did it again with the exact same data I'd then see speeds in excess of 800MB/s. This led me to believe my data was first read or written from/to disk but then cached in memory for quicker access.

 

Regardless of how much RAM is in the system it never followed any trend anywhere leading the 1GB per TB to appear true but since everybody was saying it was I wasn't going to be the one guy to go against everyone. This thread is a perfect example of what happens when going against the crowd. I will say though for businesses that read a lot of information off a similar server using relatively big files (100MB, 500MB, 1GB+) having more RAM to cache more information would seem to be beneficial from the numbers I've seen though the 1GB per TB thing is debunked. I'll add you thread to my signature and I'll stop telling people the myth.

 

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

But yes a lot of people have very strong opinions on what is classed as server class equipment and what isn't and where it is appropriate to use it, myself included . I really do understand the tight budgets of small businesses but as @NZLaurence pointed out few would be able to survive the return to base warranty of a parts built server.

I can see people viewing it as a gamble. The initial cost may be lower but if something very important fails like the motherboard the downtime could cost the company a lot of money. Even if a bare bones Dell or HPE server is used a very nice thing about FreeNAS is you can backup the servers configuration and import volumes so assuming the board failing didn't take out the RAIDZ array you could temporarily put the disks in a backup system. Import the array and install the "configuration".db file. Could be back up and running in as little as an hour depending on how prepared you are.

[NZLaurence]

1 hour ago, Windows7ge said:

I can see people viewing it as a gamble. The initial cost may be lower but if something very important fails like the motherboard the downtime could cost the company a lot of money. Even if a bare bones Dell or HPE server is used a very nice thing about FreeNAS is you can backup the servers configuration and import volumes so assuming the board failing didn't take out the RAIDZ array you could temporarily put the disks in a backup system. Import the array and install the "configuration".db file. Could be back up and running in as little as an hour depending on how prepared you are.

I think thats the point. What you described there could be done by a good technician, however I would suggest that most small businesses don't have a technician on their permanent payroll. To be able to transplant drives and RAID controllers to a new machine and then import the config is not an 'easy' solution.

To ring a toll free number and then have a tech turn up onsite with a whole spare machine and swap out the faulty part that same day can be very much worth it.