Utilizing NAS server for multiple applications

[CNA5018]

Hey All,

 

New to building a NAS, bought an off the shelf one for movie storage years ago so now want to build and expand it and properly store it. I was hoping to buy a NAS server rack with lets say 5 bays. I was hoping to use three of them in RAID  configuration for the movies and the others for file storage and/or Surveillance footage in another raid configuration. To fit this example, is it possible to partition three drives in a raid together and partition the other 2 for a different task, all within the same box. It probably is, but do not know where to begin. 

 

I am trying to not have to buy one rack for the movies and another rack for the files and surveillance footage.  

 

Thank you. 

[Electronics Wizardy]

Yep you cana normally have 2 raaid array in a sinple box, but why? its normally better to have one big volume. Just store the data in different datasets or folders.

[Windows7ge]

A rack is a place to store the servers. A rack isn't a server. Servers most often come in 1U, 2U, and 4U variants (among anthers) and the hard drives are stored in bays or slots.

 

As for your question. Software RAID allows just about any RAID you like RAID0,1,5,6,10(maybe 50, 51, 60, 61 depending on OS) and as many of them as you have physical bays so you could have 4 independent RAIDs one for movie/videos, 1 for excess data, 1 for security footage, and another for anything else, or even more all in one "box". This server would then get inserted into the rack. A rack is basically a drawer for servers.

[Windows7ge]

3 minutes ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

Yep you cana normally have 2 raaid array in a sinple box, but why? its normally better to have one big volume. Just store the data in different datasets or folders.

I at least like the idea of 1 raid for personal data and a 2nd independent raid for security. At least then if one raid goes down for any reason it doesn't affect the other.

[Electronics Wizardy]

Just now, Windows7ge said:

I at least like the idea of 1 raid for personal data and a 2nd independent raid for security. At least then if one raid goes down for any reason it doesn't affect the other.

Thats why we have external backups, the chance of one raid failing is low, and you can still lose data to other issues that destroy the whole unit.

[Windows7ge]

14 minutes ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

Thats why we have external backups, the chance of one raid failing is low, and you can still lose data to other issues that destroy the whole unit.

True, but you really want it functioning often as possible and you don't want 2 servers (one to serve as a backup) then I still think 2 raids isn't a bad idea. What if you want to upgrade the disks and don't have enough bays to plug them all in at once? You'll have one array offline for quite a while while you copy the data off-site just the upgrade the disks. All the while your security system is offline.

 

Really though it's a situational issue. In my opinion either is acceptable dependant on situation.

[Electronics Wizardy]

Just now, Windows7ge said:

True, but you really want it functioning often as possible and you don't want 2 servers (one to serve as a backup) then I still think 2 raids isn't a bad idea. What if you want to upgrade the disks and don't have enough bays to plug them all in at once? You'll have one array offline for quite a while while you copy the data off-site just the upgrade the disks. All the while your security system is offline.

 

Really though it's a situational issue. In my opinion either is acceptable dependant on situation.

A external drive would well well for a backup here, and is much easier to put somewhere like a bank safe deposit box.

 

I haven't seem many things where the array is forced to be offline, you can had a disk hot. WIth these systems you can upgrade one drive at a time to make it bigger.

 

Your much better getting a external hdd for this as the chance of a raid failing is very low, and it still doesn't protect you about from things like full system corruption, fire, user error, and other hardware issues.

[AngryBeaver]

2 hours ago, CNA5018 said:

Hey All,

 

New to building a NAS, bought an off the shelf one for movie storage years ago so now want to build and expand it and properly store it. I was hoping to buy a NAS server rack with lets say 5 bays. I was hoping to use three of them in RAID  configuration for the movies and the others for file storage and/or Surveillance footage in another raid configuration. To fit this example, is it possible to partition three drives in a raid together and partition the other 2 for a different task, all within the same box. It probably is, but do not know where to begin. 

 

I am trying to not have to buy one rack for the movies and another rack for the files and surveillance footage.  

 

Thank you. 

Just know that the biggest expense is going to be your storage drives.. they add up fast. Even with the current deals on seagate stuff on amazon a 4tb drive is $99 and a 8tb is $194

 

First you will need a server rack. I would suggest a half rack tbh. Then since you don't see to need much cpu power you can pick up an older X5xxx xeon system with dual quad or six cores and 16-24 HDD bays for $150-300 depending on components in it.

 

This would give you plenty of storage space. So if you ran 16 - 8 tb drives for example in raid 6. This would give you a fault tolerance of 2 drives before your raid is not recoverable. That means 2 drives would be for backup and the other 14 would be for storage giving you 112tb of the 128tb.

 

If you used say 4tb drives cut that in half for 56 of 64.

 

Now that is maximum capacity... my point is it would give you the best upgrade path and you could only use a few drives if you want and then add more as time goes on.

 

The price part does come in to play.. to fill that server with 4tb would set you back $1,600 pre-tax and 8tb drives would set you back $3,104 pre-tax.

 

*edit* to answer your original question yes it is possible, but depending on how much redundancy you want the 3 drive setup would probably only give you 2 drives worth of storage.  The 2 raid setup would only give you 1 drive worth. Now if you run raid 0 you would get the full storage amount, but would lose all redundancy.

 

So if you want to have that much storage on hand BEFORE raid redundancy you will need more drives.

[Windows7ge]

8 hours ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

A external drive would well well for a backup here, and is much easier to put somewhere like a bank safe deposit box.

 

I haven't seem many things where the array is forced to be offline, you can had a disk hot. WIth these systems you can upgrade one drive at a time to make it bigger.

 

Your much better getting a external hdd for this as the chance of a raid failing is very low, and it still doesn't protect you about from things like full system corruption, fire, user error, and other hardware issues.

Hmm, there's just to many variables and varying situations. I see your way working for home gamers who want a quick server running an OS they're familiar with (windows server) but others who run varying Linux distributions (who have not mastered them) I just don't see that being the best solution for every situation. Though I will agree it's simpler, easier to manage and maintain, and uses marginally less electricity.