Server storage dilema

[Amit Moryossef]

My dad has a server with 2x100gb HDDs in raid 1, separated into 2 volumes.

It is not at all enough for his needs, so I want to get him an upgrade.

 

I don't want to change the raid structure, because it works the way it is, and my dad does not like changes.

I was thinking on 2x1TB hard drives. Are the WD Red drives good enough, or should I get something else?

 

Also, I wanted to know how to go about the upgrade.

To get 0 down-time, I thought of perhaps removing one old drive, and inserting one new drive into the raid, and it will get mirrored, and then remove the other old drive and insert the other new one, and finally expend the volumes to whatever size he wants.

The other solution I have is to create a windows backup to an external drive, replace the drives, and install windows from a backup.

Will the first method work? Is there a better way to go at it?

 

Thanks!

[SCHISCHKA]

You cannot remove a drive from a raid0

do you not have two spare sata ports

[Amit Moryossef]

Just now, SCHISCHKA said:

You cannot remove a drive from a raid0

do you not have two spare sata ports

I do have spare ports, but I want to replace the entire thing, no use for a 100gb drive there. I will go the other way then (backup / restore -> replace the entire raid)

 

[Amit Moryossef]

4 minutes ago, SCHISCHKA said:

You cannot remove a drive from a raid0

do you not have two spare sata ports

Oops correction, its raid 1 (mirroring)

[Oshino Shinobu]

Your solution will result in a significant amount of down time. From the time you remove one drive to the time the new array with the new drives is up and running, you won't be able to access the data. 

 

The best way to go about this is to leave the drives in the system, install the new drives and set them up, then copy everything over and then remove the old drives (or keep them in if you're still going to be using them. The only down time you actually have then is the time it takes to turn off the system to install the new drives. 

 

I really wouldn't advise RAID 0 for a storage server though. If you're going to be splitting them into partitions anyway, just run then as individual drives so that if one dies you only lose the data on that drive, not everything. Assuming this is connected and accessed over the network. If so, the network is going to be limiting the transfer speeds before the drives, so there's no benefit to RAID 0

[Oshino Shinobu]

Just now, Amit Moryossef said:

Oops correction, its raid 1 (mirroring)

If you haven't got a backup solution prepared already, I would advise only using one drive in the server and using the other for a periodical backup (unless you can do RAID 1 and a backup). Given how things have been going with WannaCry recently, it's become even more apparent how RAID is not a substitute for a good backup as it can/will get encrypted just the same as a single drive, meaning you'd just have two copies of encrypted data. A periodical backup that is not accessible from the network is a better solution that RAID 1, if you have to choice one or the other. 

[Amit Moryossef]

1 minute ago, Oshino Shinobu said:

Your solution will result in a significant amount of down time. From the time you remove one drive to the time the new array with the new drives is up and running, you won't be able to access the data. 

 

The best way to go about this is to leave the drives in the system, install the new drives and set them up, then copy everything over and then remove the old drives (or keep them in if you're still going to be using them. The only down time you actually have then is the time it takes to turn off the system to install the new drives. 

 

I really wouldn't advise RAID 0 for a storage server though. If you're going to be splitting them into partitions anyway, just run then as individual drives so that if one dies you only lose the data on that drive, not everything. Assuming this is connected and accessed over the network. If so, the network is going to be limiting the transfer speeds before the drives, so there's no benefit to RAID 0

Ok, that sounds like a good solution.

Also, apologies, made a mistake, it's raid 1, not 0  

 

So: connect both new drives -> use a drive cloning software (any recommendation?) -> replace old drives with new drives?

[Amit Moryossef]

1 minute ago, Oshino Shinobu said:

If you haven't got a backup solution prepared already, I would advise only using one drive in the server and using the other for a periodical backup (unless you can do RAID 1 and a backup). Given how things have been going with WannaCry recently, it's become even more apparent how RAID is not a substitute for a good backup as it can/will get encrypted just the same as a single drive, meaning you'd just have two copies of encrypted data. A periodical backup that is not accessible from the network is a better solution that RAID 1, if you have to choice one or the other. 

Thanks, I have a backup disk on site (periodical), network backup (image), then daily FTP backup for the data to my home, and a periodical full drive image (once a month I take it home)

[Oshino Shinobu]

Just now, Amit Moryossef said:

Ok, that sounds like a good solution.

Also, apologies, made a mistake, it's raid 1, not 0  

 

So: connect both new drives -> use a drive cloning software (any recommendation?) -> replace old drives with new drives?

What kind of data is on the drives? If it's just things like images, text documents, video files etc. you can literally just copy+paste it across. For things like system files and applications, drive cloning is a better solution, but there can still be issues with things not working correctly so I generally don't like using it unless it's very important you keep it as is. My personal preference would be to install any programs from scratch and just copy over data like images, text documents etc. 

 

But basically, yeah. Set up the new drives first, then move everything across. Less steps and less downtime (theoretically 0 down time, minus installing the drives, but when transferring the data, it will likely be slow if you're accessing it as well). 

[Amit Moryossef]

1 minute ago, Oshino Shinobu said:

What kind of data is on the drives? If it's just things like images, text documents, video files etc. you can literally just copy+paste it across. For things like system files and applications, drive cloning is a better solution, but there can still be issues with things not working correctly so I generally don't like using it unless it's very important you keep it as is. My personal preference would be to install any programs from scratch and just copy over data like images, text documents etc. 

 

But basically, yeah. Set up the new drives first, then move everything across. Less steps and less downtime (theoretically 0 down time, minus installing the drives, but when transferring the data, it will likely be slow if you're accessing it as well). 

Good, so final thing, are the WD red good for servers or anything else I should get?

[SCHISCHKA]

15 minutes ago, Amit Moryossef said:

I do have spare ports, but I want to replace the entire thing, no use for a 100gb drive there. I will go the other way then (backup / restore -> replace the entire raid)

 

 Is the os on those drives?

i don't put my os on the storage array because it makes things easier.

I see no reason why you should not be able to put your new drives in, then transfer data, then remove old drives

[Oshino Shinobu]

4 minutes ago, Amit Moryossef said:

Good, so final thing, are the WD red good for servers or anything else I should get?

WD Reds are good. They have some extra features like vibration compensation and TLER (won't really be used outside of hardware RAID though). They're designed to run 24/7 so are well suited to server environments (designed for NAS and RAID use)

[SCHISCHKA]

6 minutes ago, Amit Moryossef said:

Good, so final thing, are the WD red good for servers or anything else I should get?

I bought reds and they are great. Prob the best for quality and price. They are pretty fast too. WD blue is not good for price/warranty. Black are too expensive. I bought some WD RE drives which back then were the enterprise grade. They are such good quality they have outlasted capacity requirements, which is why I say the reds are good enough

[Amit Moryossef]

1 minute ago, SCHISCHKA said:

 Is the os on those drives?

i don't put my os on the storage array because it makes things easier.

I see no reason why you should not be able to put your new drives in, then transfer data, then remove old drives

Unfortunately, yes. I'll try convincing my dad to keep the drives separate.

If I do manage to separate, should I get SSDs for the OS? something like 2x250gb samsung 850 evo?

[SCHISCHKA]

3 minutes ago, Oshino Shinobu said:

WD Reds are good. They have some extra features like vibration compensation and TLER (won't really be used outside of hardware RAID though). They're designed to run 24/7 so are well suited to server environments (designed for NAS and RAID use)

WD say blue and black are good for two drive arrays and reds are good up to something like 8 drives. i thought TLER does make a difference with software raid as its firmware error detection has been turned off to allow the raid software or hardware to handle error correction. I once tried some WD blue oem drives in a raid1+0 and one drive would constantly drop out of the array

[SCHISCHKA]

4 minutes ago, Amit Moryossef said:

Unfortunately, yes. I'll try convincing my dad to keep the drives separate.

If I do manage to separate, should I get SSDs for the OS? something like 2x250gb samsung 850 evo?

What is the operating system? A simple Linux or bsd can be booted off USB and run in ram

[Amit Moryossef]

22 minutes ago, SCHISCHKA said:

What is the operating system? A simple Linux or bsd can be booted off USB and run in ram

Well yes, I wish it was linux, but it can't be. It is Windows Server 2008

[Jarsky]

What server is this? 

Is the RAID configured via Hardware or in Windows Disk Management?

Does your Dad require the uptime that RAID1 provides?

Can your Dad go a few hours of downtime? 100GB doesnt take long to sync so downtime would probably be a couple of hours if you were just to resync the mirror.