Discussion in 'Storage & Backup' started by ABEIQ, Jul 24, 2013.
That's $120 for two licenses.
Yes, if you make raid-z or zfs mirror.
RAID-Z (similar to RAID-5), you can lose 1 drive.
RAID-Z2 (similar to RAID-6), you can lose 2 drives
RAID-Z3, you can lose 3 drives
zfs is the best file system, with raid built in(and other things).
zfs has also a checksum on every file, so it knows if a file is defective, in other file systems you wil not know this(or you have to check it youself).
Search for more info about zfs.
If a disk get bad sectors(with raid-z or mirror)then zfs can repair this, in de file system, so you do not lose the file, because of the raid or mirror it can repair your file(and not the disk).
nas4free is easy to install, only the file sytem(zfs) install on the disks is a little difficult, on youtube you see examples then you can do this. If you know a little then you can do this.
I also did a new install and import of the zfs, very easy, i forgot to make a backup file with settings of the server/zfs(xml file).
And you do not need a monitor/keyboard on your system, you have a webpage to do everything, like a nas.
$119 for a pro license, the standard license goes to 7 drives.
ZFS does not 'repair' the file, it merely replaces it with a fresh copy of the file from parity, which ZFS does on the fly. The downside to this is that, if you are relying on utilising your radi setup as a quasi-backup, whereby if you overwrite a file or make changes, you can't revert back on realtime systems like ZFS, you can with snapshot setups.
I Have, but i dont really like the idea of using it, although the plugins are available, until i see a solution better than flexraid or snapraid for my uses, then i dont think i will change
unRaid Costs more than im willing to spend, i would rather pay for drives than software until i have a decent set of LARGE drives
I had a look into snapraid and im thinking about giving it a go on my server, the fact there is a windows based version makes me very happy
My issue with using ZFS is that i am fairly unwilling to go to another os that supports ZFS, as stubborn as it sounds :S
This is my issue, i dont want to have to spend amounts of money on software if i dont even have the drives i want, especially at that cost, the standard lic is already costly and limits you to 7 drives, where as flexraid is MUCH cheaper and goes to unlimited drives with all copies.
Time for some updates. Picked up some 300GB 15k sas drives and a 4 channel LSI raid card for $40 - looking to sell the drives btw haha
At the moment im up to 15 drives, and ill be getting 4X1TB hard drives this week . Still havent sorted out what im going to do with FLEXRAID etc
ZFS corrects bad sectors. Bad sectors can be physically bad or physically working perfectly. The latter will not be replaced by a reserve sector once overwritten.
What does ZFS do when it encounters an unreadable sector on any member drive?
1. It tries to read from redundant source (RAID-Z/mirror redundancy or ditto blocks)
2. Once it has redundant data, it knows the contents of the unreadable sector on the affected harddrive.
3. It then overwrites the bad sector with the data that should have been there.
Once the harddrive receives instructions to overwrite the bad sector, the problem is fixed instantly! Either one of two things can happen:
1. After overwriting the sector still cannot be read; physically bad sector; replace by reserve sector (Reallocated Sector Count is increased).
2. After overwriting the sector, it can be read without problem. No physical damage so we do not swap the sector for a reserve one (Current Pending Sector subtracted, Reallocated Sector Count unchanged).
In other words, ZFS is basically immune to bad sectors in a redundant configuration and will repair/fix any bad sector it finds, without the user ever noticing there is a problem. ZFS is a third generation filesystem, not a legacy filesystem or legacy RAID that chokes on bad sectors.
might want to watch your power consumption too! swapper from 1.5tb drive (x12) to 3tb drive (x8) with a significant reduction in power draw.
It just sounds like you're just playing around, so you may as well go free with ZFS even if you don't want to, because you're unwilling/unable to pay for something that's serious.
Haha yeah It would be pretty insane except 7 drives are 500gb 2.5" and 1 more a SSD. The rest are 3.5 and slowly ill be upgrading to larger drives that I can afford, more than 75% of this server was free all I can think of that ive paid for is both controllers 3 x 2tb and the 4x1tb drives.
Ive been considering it, just pretty unwilling to go off to linux :/. What would be the best distro for zfs and could someone please in 2 or 3 sentences summarise the advantages and disadvantages of both?
Linux is for the plebeians.
Real storage freaks use BSD with ZFS, which sports the best ZFS implementation.
A list of ZFS platforms:
FreeNAS - complete features (BSD)
NAS4Free - better interface (BSD)
ZFSguru - easiest solution (BSD)
Solaris - for the nerds not wanting to jump a sinking ship
Nexenta - for the lovers of proprietary software
Linux - for the casual and uninitiated
Test out some products within a VirtualBox VM, and decide on your own best solution. Not choosing ZFS these days is dangerous; as Btrfs and ReFS are not yet mature enough, causing only inferior filesystems to be available as alternative.