Freenas 3x6TB WD Reds?

[TJSidhu]

Hi I need abit of help.

 

Im planning my freenas build...

I think im going to use 3x6TB WD REDs in RaidZ1 would this be ok considering there 6TB in RaidZ1? I dont know how well RaidZ1 works with 6TB Drives?

Also Would i be able to use 4x6TB RaidZ1? I dont see the point in using 4x6TB RaidZ2 so i thought 3x6TB RaidZ1 made more sense.

[Jarsky]

Yup that would work fine. It's not really to do with the capacity of the drives, as it is more an issue with the number of parity drives to total disks in the array.

You want at least 1 Parity drive for every 5-6 disks.

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

Look into smaller drives. I made the comparison when I planned my NAS, and found the 3TB and 4TB to be much cheaper per GB than the 6TB drives.

You may be able to get that 18TB (12TB usable) cheaper by going for 6x 3TB (4x 3TB + 2x 3TB for redundancy, which also means you can run RAIDZ2 rather than Z1)

[Captain_WD]

Hi I need abit of help.

 

Im planning my freenas build...

I think im going to use 3x6TB WD REDs in RaidZ1 would this be ok considering there 6TB in RaidZ1? I dont know how well RaidZ1 works with 6TB Drives?

Also Would i be able to use 4x6TB RaidZ1? I dont see the point in using 4x6TB RaidZ2 so i thought 3x6TB RaidZ1 made more sense.

 

Hey TJSidhu,

 

Less drives in an array should theoretically mean less mechanical units that can fail. More drives - larger chance of failure. On the other side, if you have more drives and can use two drives for redundancy instead of one that would be much safer than using only one (the RAIDZ2 option). 

 

Larger drives are generally faster compared to the ones with lower capacity due to data density so you should get faster speeds provided you use the same amount of data. 

 

It really depends on how much safety, number of drives and speed you are looking for. If using more drives or would like more speed (and your budget allows it) I could suggest checking out WD Red Pro: http://products.wdc.com/support/kb.ashx?id=iKEJdf

 

Captain_WD.

[TJSidhu]

 

Hey TJSidhu,

 

Less drives in an array should theoretically mean less mechanical units that can fail. More drives - larger chance of failure. On the other side, if you have more drives and can use two drives for redundancy instead of one that would be much safer than using only one (the RAIDZ2 option). 

 

Larger drives are generally faster compared to the ones with lower capacity due to data density so you should get faster speeds provided you use the same amount of data. 

 

It really depends on how much safety, number of drives and speed you are looking for. If using more drives or would like more speed (and your budget allows it) I could suggest checking out WD Red Pro: http://products.wdc.com/support/kb.ashx?id=iKEJdf

 

Captain_WD.

 

 

 

Look into smaller drives. I made the comparison when I planned my NAS, and found the 3TB and 4TB to be much cheaper per GB than the 6TB drives.

You may be able to get that 18TB (12TB usable) cheaper by going for 6x 3TB (4x 3TB + 2x 3TB for redundancy, which also means you can run RAIDZ2 rather than Z1)

 

 

Yup that would work fine. It's not really to do with the capacity of the drives, as it is more an issue with the number of parity drives to total disks in the array.

You want at least 1 Parity drive for every 5-6 disks.

 

Thanks for your comments...

I was reading somewhere RaidZ2 should be used with 6 or more drives?

Also can I mix drives 6TB's with 4TB's? I'm most likely not going to do this was just wondering.

I'm going to use the Node 605 case it only holds 4xHDD That's why I wanted to go with bigger size and less drives.

Option 1) 3x6TB WD REDs in RaidZ1 - I would like to do RaidZ2 but don't have the budget right now for the extra drive. When I get the money ill get the 4 drive and go RaidZ2.

Option 2) 4x4TB RaidZ2 - Going 4TB's I would save £100. but would lose 4TB of data space and add 1 extra drive space.. don't have the space for 6 drives etc so would be stuck at 8TB/8TB.

other options for cases  [u-NAS NSC-800 or SilverStone DS380] Would have to spend more money as cases cost more and would have to get extra psu for case aswell.

I think I might have to stick with option 1) or find a new case =(

[Captain_WD]

~snip~

 

Mixing different sized HDDs in the same RAID array would only limit the size of the larger ones to the size of the smallest. The way RAID works is that it limits the size of all drives to the one of the smallest in the array and the speed of all drives to the one of the slowest.

 

I'd first consider how much storage space is really needed now and down the road and see if you can get some of the storage space now nad upgrade later or you would need the maximum possible now. If you can hold it with the storage space for now, I would look for a bigger case and more powerful parts and leave the HDD expansion for when more funds are available.

 

Captain_WD.