If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Implementing a RAID System
Hello,
I am thinking about implementing a RAID system for my server. I need to install something external because of the lack of room inside of the machine. What I am asking is what type of issues do I need to be looking at? It seems that I have heard of RAID 'boxes' specifically designed for this purpose. Basically, I would like to know if anyone has any sites, etc that explain how to go about adding a RAID system to a server. Thanks, Chris |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 10:44:05 -0500, "Chris Guimbellot"
wrote: Hello, I am thinking about implementing a RAID system for my server. I need to install something external because of the lack of room inside of the machine. What I am asking is what type of issues do I need to be looking at? It seems that I have heard of RAID 'boxes' specifically designed for this purpose. Basically, I would like to know if anyone has any sites, etc that explain how to go about adding a RAID system to a server. Thanks, Chris There are two ways to add external DAS raid: either an external JBOD enclosure connected to an internal controller or an enclosure which has a controller built in and connects to a local bus. realistically you are looking at two interfaces to connect these enclosures to the computer: SCSI & firewire. Where you look next is going to depend on budget, preference, performance & data security requirements. Since there are so many options there is no one site to direct you. As I don't know exactly what you are looking for it's silly to start dictating specific products. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 05:58:43 GMT, Curious George wrote:
snip realistically you are looking at two interfaces to connect these enclosures to the computer: SCSI & firewire. Also to some extent SATA. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 10:44:05 -0500, "Chris Guimbellot"
wrote: Hello, I am thinking about implementing a RAID system for my server. I need to install something external because of the lack of room inside of the machine. What I am asking is what type of issues do I need to be looking at? It seems that I have heard of RAID 'boxes' specifically designed for this purpose. Basically, I would like to know if anyone has any sites, etc that explain how to go about adding a RAID system to a server. Thanks, Chris IMO, you should look at a larger server case, keep them internal if possible. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:17:52 GMT, kony wrote:
snip IMO, you should look at a larger server case, keep them internal if possible. could you explain why? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
I have never heard that they should be internal. Why is that? Is it a speed
issue. I appreciate your response. "kony" wrote in message ... On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 10:44:05 -0500, "Chris Guimbellot" wrote: Hello, I am thinking about implementing a RAID system for my server. I need to install something external because of the lack of room inside of the machine. What I am asking is what type of issues do I need to be looking at? It seems that I have heard of RAID 'boxes' specifically designed for this purpose. Basically, I would like to know if anyone has any sites, etc that explain how to go about adding a RAID system to a server. Thanks, Chris IMO, you should look at a larger server case, keep them internal if possible. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 03:25:24 GMT, Curious George
wrote: On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:17:52 GMT, kony wrote: snip IMO, you should look at a larger server case, keep them internal if possible. could you explain why? Because there's no benefit to the external chassis, not to address any need that has been mentioned. Internal keeps cooling and power simple, usually better. It is generally quieter, also better protection to not have daisey-chained external boxes. That may not matter, but it might. Internal will be significantly faster than USB or firewire, and (maybe I'm wrong?) I expect SATA or SCSI external to be significantly more expensive. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
I asked you to elaborate because it wasn't clear to me whether you
were referring to price, convenience, quality, or something else. The OP simply stated there was lack of room for an array. It's not clear if he has a small, crammed chassis or a large server case that is maxxed out, or he wants a large raid volume or several volumes. Thanks for elaborating. As I see it the main advantages of external raid a - larger arrays or more complex setups simply don't fit internally or leave no room to scale. Even relatively simple setups require somewhat pricey chassis for reliable builds & might be well served through use of external boxes (depending on projected plans). - makes for a more modular system which can be easier to scale or swap out - external boxes offload the power & cooling responsibilities of the main computer yielding more headroom for cooling & power safety margin. One needs a high quality $$ server chassis & power supplies for similar cooling & power quality - where the price differential against a small & simple jbod enclosure is less significant or may even be nil. - a computer chassis (even a larger server chassis) which wasn't initially purchased with the idea of adding hotswap raid, often doesn't have enough bays to add this. Rebuilding the computer with a new, good raidable chassis may or may not make sense. That being said external boxes are less convenient if the system needs to be moved or powered down. An external switch/control may be necessary to compensate somewhat - but you may need this anyway esp for remote management if this is a server. If you are willing to spend it is certainly possible to get advanced monitoring features & protective redundancy in either so that is essentially a wash. Internal raid is: - more convenient in many respects; everything is included & managed & can be transported in one box. Everything is powered up or down with one switch without need for 3rd party power control. - If the failure/recovery philosophy favors swap out & replacement of whole systems rather than parts (for speed or because of support contracts) then this is better. As far as noise, either setup can be noisy or quiet. Either can be made quiet with careful planning & minimal cost (except in certain cases). Noise of course is not always an issue - it only depends on whether ppl work or live around it. I don't buy the better protection argument. A system that is important enough for RAID and is set up properly & appropriately should just be humming along & left alone in one place, out of the way of prying or tinkering hands. A tinkerer can just as easily mess up an internal setup anyway. It's common to have alarms/access control for server rooms (& for the paranoid for home offices as well) & locks on HW or protective racks/enclosures. As far as speed scsi & sata should not decrease when external. USB is totally inappropriate for raid due to speed & flakiness. Firewire is not normally done "internally" and AFIK is slower than scsi (haven't compared FW to sata). As we've discussed before price is a little more complicated than initial investment. Even still when you compare quality items of either interface the difference in initial investment is not that impressive (IMO). Quality is another troubling point. FWIS External firewire & sata offerings tend to be, well crap. While there is also a ton of crappy scsi raid items, at this time, it appears that one stands a better chance of finding something decent there - in which case it is very well suited to external solutions or an internal & external mix. In summary yes I agree with your recommendation (as long as it is a small & simple home or small workgroup server) but for different reasons: it will be easier to manage in the end & will avoid the pitfalls of so many crappy external gear. But internal isn't always possible, or necessarily more likely to be quieter, or easier, or protected, or better powered & cooled, or faster, or significantly more expensive (IMHO). |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 21:14:24 GMT, net newb wrote:
OOPS. from wrong computer. (brain on hold) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 21:17:21 GMT, Curios George
wrote: On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 21:14:24 GMT, net newb wrote: OOPS. from wrong computer. (brain on hold) Still a bad idea, IMO. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
adding raid controller to system with onboard raid | Colin Day | General | 0 | November 25th 04 08:49 PM |
How to setup (copy) the Data to Raid 1 Harddisk | hon123456 | General | 1 | October 29th 04 09:41 AM |
Problems setting up SATA Raid system | Clivet | General | 0 | January 4th 04 07:40 PM |
Multi-boot Windows XP without special software | Timothy Daniels | General | 11 | December 12th 03 06:38 AM |
help. ga-7vrxp raid trouble, compatability and warning | todd elliott | General | 0 | July 17th 03 06:50 PM |