Suggestion for a file server?
Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee
Suggestion for a file server?
Thinking about swapping out my hard drives in the work computer into a file server--they are too loud for my taste. I have a 5400rpm 40GB hard drive lying around (as much as it is hard to believe) which was pretty darn quiet in the last system it was in before I upgraded but I digress. I decided to make a file server with these hard drives. They don't need to be overly quiet; they'll run in my closet (like many people in the forum, it seems). I have the case, I'll pick up a cheap Antec PSU when rebates come around at Best Buy or some place like that... but then it comes to the question of the rig itself. I'm short on cash and I don't want to waste money on an overpowered rig that will do nothing but read files. So... how powerful should a file server be? How low can I go and still get away with a decent performance? I have never done this so I need some advice. It will run two PATA hard drives with combined storage of 320GB.
-
- Posts: 1386
- Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 6:53 pm
No, I don't have any parts lying around; otherwise I would have used them. I am thinking of either getting some used parts from elsewhere or buying extreme low-end parts from Newegg (Celeron D with SiS chipset? Bleah, but what can I do?). Speaking of which, I don't know how little of a ram I need to use. Is 256MB okay? I am wondering. Also, what kind of OS should I use? I have Windows 2000, XP Pro, 98 and Ubuntu (I have no faith in them, or rather, I have never used Linux before).
-
- Posts: 1386
- Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 6:53 pm
I wouldn't advise buying Celeron D as it's based on prescott core and runs a tad hot. If you want to go with celeron, either get mobile celeron (the kind used in laptops) there might be some hardware incompabilities, but if it works, it's good and costs next to nothing. Or get a used northwood based socket 478 celeron, although as far as I'm aware these jumped in price in the last year.
Your best bet would probably be sempron based machine. These are readily available, fairly cheap and run cool. Just make sure your motherboard has drivers for the OS of your choice, otherwise you may end up with a situation where your hard drives are locked in UDMA2 mode or something.
Concerning OS, either Win2000 or XP Pro would be fine. Don't use Win98 as those cannot see and cannot be seen from win2000/winxp machines as far as I remember (could be wrong, long time ago). In any case win98 with a fat32 filesystem is a really poor choice for fileserver. I don't know much about Ubuntu, I've only dug into linux as far as I had to and not a step further. So I can't offer much advice here. However, one thing I can tell you, both my fedora core and red hat linux at uni take about 200Mb of memory, whereas bare Win2000/winxp installation with all the drivers installed usually take 100-125Mb of memory. So if you only got 256Mb of ram, you might want to stick up with windows. Of course you could cut down on memory usage if you run in CLI mode without graphical interface, but meh.... that's not for me.
Your best bet would probably be sempron based machine. These are readily available, fairly cheap and run cool. Just make sure your motherboard has drivers for the OS of your choice, otherwise you may end up with a situation where your hard drives are locked in UDMA2 mode or something.
Concerning OS, either Win2000 or XP Pro would be fine. Don't use Win98 as those cannot see and cannot be seen from win2000/winxp machines as far as I remember (could be wrong, long time ago). In any case win98 with a fat32 filesystem is a really poor choice for fileserver. I don't know much about Ubuntu, I've only dug into linux as far as I had to and not a step further. So I can't offer much advice here. However, one thing I can tell you, both my fedora core and red hat linux at uni take about 200Mb of memory, whereas bare Win2000/winxp installation with all the drivers installed usually take 100-125Mb of memory. So if you only got 256Mb of ram, you might want to stick up with windows. Of course you could cut down on memory usage if you run in CLI mode without graphical interface, but meh.... that's not for me.
-
- Friend of SPCR
- Posts: 680
- Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 4:50 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact:
Have you considered ClarkConnect as an OS? There is an updated version due out on the 13th of July.
It's a dedicated Server/Firewall OS and is great for running in a headless system, I'm testing it at the moment.
It's a dedicated Server/Firewall OS and is great for running in a headless system, I'm testing it at the moment.
Okay--then I guess I'll stick with Windows 2000 for time being; that's the OS i am most familiar with (and I guess that's not necessarily a bad thing?).
As for the hardware, though, I only said Celeron D because it is cheap (they seem to hit rock bottom--with $40 for a 315). Perhaps, although my gut is suggesting against this, I should shell out $200 and buy an A64 mobo and CPU (yay, venice) and send down my Sempron system (my current rig) as a fileserver? Seems like a boatload of waste, since my Sempron works plenty well, but... hmm. Maybe I should look for a secondhand system at craigslist or something, after all... I'm a college student; I'm short on money.
As for the hardware, though, I only said Celeron D because it is cheap (they seem to hit rock bottom--with $40 for a 315). Perhaps, although my gut is suggesting against this, I should shell out $200 and buy an A64 mobo and CPU (yay, venice) and send down my Sempron system (my current rig) as a fileserver? Seems like a boatload of waste, since my Sempron works plenty well, but... hmm. Maybe I should look for a secondhand system at craigslist or something, after all... I'm a college student; I'm short on money.
-
- Posts: 126
- Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 12:16 pm
mini-itx
mini-itx systems make good file servers. They're small and don't use much power. You might be able to pick up a used one cheap. A new one would run you $100-$200, plus another $70 for the power converter and AC adapter. A word of warning, though: the C3 chips are really, really slow. I have a CL6000E file server that is fine for serving files, but not fast enough for much else.
If price is the most important factor, you might be able to pick up an old PII 400 or some such somewhere super cheap.
In any case, for any slow or low-RAM computer, running linux and samba is probably a better bet than Windows 2000.
If price is the most important factor, you might be able to pick up an old PII 400 or some such somewhere super cheap.
In any case, for any slow or low-RAM computer, running linux and samba is probably a better bet than Windows 2000.
Dude, really. It's a file server. Unless you're putting it online to serve 200gb of porn, you really can get away with using a P2. [Which isn't to say that's your best option.] I'd check classifieds and eBay and kids at your school for anyone wanting to ditch an old P3 system capable of using the hard disks you're using.duality wrote:Perhaps, although my gut is suggesting against this, I should shell out $200 and buy an A64 mobo and CPU (yay, venice) and send down my Sempron system (my current rig) as a fileserver? Seems like a boatload of waste, since my Sempron works plenty well, but... hmm. Maybe I should look for a secondhand system at craigslist or something, after all... I'm a college student; I'm short on money.
Then you don't have to buy components; see, there's this funny things that happens where buying a new part from 6 years ago isn't any cheaper than buying a new part from 3 years ago. Like, for instance, I can buy someone's entire used P3 system for the cost of 1 new P3-1ghz. It's stupid, but there are valid market reasons for it. So instead of parting yourself out a new but ancient system, just buy someone's [decently treated] six-year-old machine for US$50, and buy whatever parts you need to silence or improve it. That's my suggestion, anyway.
Re: Suggestion for a file server?
If you know you don't need/want SATA or gigabit ethernet, then this $60 mobo/cpu combo is a sufficient solution: PC CHIPS M789CG(V3.0A) VIA C3 Samual 2 2000+(. You'll need an ATX power supply and a stick of 184pin DDR RAM, and a case (mini-ATX is okay). Well...the case is optional if you don't feel you need it.duality wrote:It will run two PATA hard drives with combined storage of 320GB.
The VIA C3 processor is really slow, but it's easily fast enough for a file server. For a file server, the bottleneck is either the network speed (if using 100megabit ethernet) or the hard drive speed (if using gigabit). The processor speed isn't important.
I used that mobo/cpu combo for my file server, until I carelessly killed it while sloppily attempting to pry off the stock CPU heatsink.
It all comes down to how much you want to spend, and how concerned you are with having something new. For the price of the motherboard/cpu combo Isaac recommends - an excellent choice - you could get a complete P3 dual-600, which would require minimal modification for silence/quiet. [Hell, looking about, I found a complete P3 dual-600 Dell PowerEdge! And a dual Xeon 500, with a current bid of US$9.99 on eBay!] Browsing around the [h]ardforums, I noticed a completely P3 500 system for US$65, and an Athlon 750 for US$100.
Now, all these systems will take some time, money, and effort to make quiet, but in the end, provided you choose carefully, a used full system from several years ago should be less expensive than building a whole new system yourself. Now, if you had a big-ass pile of used old hardware, you could do what Isaac and I do and compile computers out of the mess, but you don't, so your choices are really build your own - fun and probably more reliable over the long term, but more expensive and more time-consuming - or buy an old, used system and modify it for your needs - somewhat less fun, slightly more risky, but much less expensive and much simpler. And if you choose well, you can get one hell of a system from some dude down the hall whose sister just bought a new MacBook and doesn't know what to do with her old PC.
Ultimately, you're going to have to choose your priorities for the project. We can advise you - we merrily will, in fact - but the more you can inform us about your needs and wants, the better we can do that.
Or you can say, "Screw this" and buy a new PC and put your Sempron in the closet. I wouldn't blame you.
Now, all these systems will take some time, money, and effort to make quiet, but in the end, provided you choose carefully, a used full system from several years ago should be less expensive than building a whole new system yourself. Now, if you had a big-ass pile of used old hardware, you could do what Isaac and I do and compile computers out of the mess, but you don't, so your choices are really build your own - fun and probably more reliable over the long term, but more expensive and more time-consuming - or buy an old, used system and modify it for your needs - somewhat less fun, slightly more risky, but much less expensive and much simpler. And if you choose well, you can get one hell of a system from some dude down the hall whose sister just bought a new MacBook and doesn't know what to do with her old PC.
Ultimately, you're going to have to choose your priorities for the project. We can advise you - we merrily will, in fact - but the more you can inform us about your needs and wants, the better we can do that.
Or you can say, "Screw this" and buy a new PC and put your Sempron in the closet. I wouldn't blame you.
One thing about scrounging up old hardware is that there are a dozen potential pitfalls which aren't obvious to a newbie.
For example, if you scrounge up an old Dell or IBM, you're probably dooming yourself to a weird proprietary motherboard, PSU, and possibly even weird proprietary fans. If you know your way around computer hardware, you can figure out if an old HP or Compaq or Gateway has got reasonably standard (m)ATX components to work with. But it takes some knowledge/experience to figure this out.
I've had the opportunity to mess around with several old Dells and IBMs, and I just had to give up on them. I pulled the RAM, CPUs, and the drives...the rest was proprietary junk that's mostly not worth struggling with. I did get one nice 80mm fan off an old IBM, though...
For example, if you scrounge up an old Dell or IBM, you're probably dooming yourself to a weird proprietary motherboard, PSU, and possibly even weird proprietary fans. If you know your way around computer hardware, you can figure out if an old HP or Compaq or Gateway has got reasonably standard (m)ATX components to work with. But it takes some knowledge/experience to figure this out.
I've had the opportunity to mess around with several old Dells and IBMs, and I just had to give up on them. I pulled the RAM, CPUs, and the drives...the rest was proprietary junk that's mostly not worth struggling with. I did get one nice 80mm fan off an old IBM, though...
Thanks for all your help! By the way--my needs? I guess my needs are not complicated: it will be a simple fileserver with my documents, movie files, music, and all miscellaneous junk that I don't necessarily need to keep in my main computer (meaning, non-program related files). I will have two computers accessing it (a laptop and a desktop) and I have a wireless card lying about so I think I can pull an ad-hoc.
My hard drives are, though, both 160GB; I do believe that is slightly larger than some systems permit (I somehow have flashback of installing a 10GB hard drive into a Pentium system, which only was able to do 7.2GB or so... wow, how long ago was this?) so I am somewhat wary of going for computers that don't support large hard drives; what kinds of chipsets/CPUs are able to read 160GB? If pentium III systems can read them, I'll probably look for an old system; if not, well... it's parts-buying time!
And... thanks, I'll stay away from the computers with propriety parts.
My hard drives are, though, both 160GB; I do believe that is slightly larger than some systems permit (I somehow have flashback of installing a 10GB hard drive into a Pentium system, which only was able to do 7.2GB or so... wow, how long ago was this?) so I am somewhat wary of going for computers that don't support large hard drives; what kinds of chipsets/CPUs are able to read 160GB? If pentium III systems can read them, I'll probably look for an old system; if not, well... it's parts-buying time!
And... thanks, I'll stay away from the computers with propriety parts.
160gig PATA drives will require 48bit LBA support. Older Pentium III motherboard BIOS's won't support 48bit LBA, but newer ones may. Any recent motherboard will have 48bit LBA support.duality wrote:what kinds of chipsets/CPUs are able to read 160GB?
None of my Pentium III machines have 48bit LBA support (3 slot-1 systems and 2 socket 370 systems).
If you're saving pennies, one possible advantage of using Linux on old hardware is that it doesn't really matter if the BIOS can't do 48bit LBA - as long as the BIOS can see the boot partition so that the OS can actually load, Linux then takes over and uses it's own internal disk addressing, ignoring the BIOS altogether (IIRC kernels 2.4.18 or later fully support HDDs >137GB).IsaacKuo wrote:160gig PATA drives will require 48bit LBA support. Older Pentium III motherboard BIOS's won't support 48bit LBA, but newer ones may. Any recent motherboard will have 48bit LBA support.duality wrote:what kinds of chipsets/CPUs are able to read 160GB?
None of my Pentium III machines have 48bit LBA support (3 slot-1 systems and 2 socket 370 systems).
Not too sure about Win2K - from what I've read some people have apparently been able to make it work with big drives on non 48bit LBA mobos although I don't think I'd want to trust my data to it...
-
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 11:18 pm
- Location: Singapore
Hi duality:
Speaking as someone who has been down this road, I'd strongly advise you to think carefully about whether you really want the trouble of running two separate computers. A couple of years ago, I decided to move my drives (4x120GB) into a separate file/web server. It seemed like a great idea at the time, but in the end it wasn't worth the hassles with hardware and software as well as the extra power drain from running two computers. Also, another computer takes up a lot of space and it's annyoing to bring it along if you have to move apartments. I've since moved the drives back into my main computer and been much happier.
Could you perhaps silence your two drives somehow (e.g. suspension?) and keep them in your main system? If not, perhaps you could sell them off cheaply and buy a single 320 GB drive? I've seen the WD3200KS for $130 CAD. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this is the same model as the 500GB WD drive SPCR gave a great review of a couple of weeks ago---only lower capacity.
This is what I would do if I were you: Put some postings on local usenet newsgroups or bulletin boards. You could probably get at least $25 each for the 160GB drives and maybe $10 for the $40GB. Put the ~$50-60 toward a single, quiet, high-capacity drive and leave your main computer on 24/7 as a combined desktop/file server and be done with it.
OK, that said, if you really do want to run a separate file server, just get an old P2/P3 and don't pay more than $50. Anything more powerful is a waste of money as it won't make a difference. A motherboard that supports ATA100 on the IDE channels would be best, but ATA66 might be sufficient. Make sure the network interface is 10/100 (almost certainly will be). I don't know much about the LBA 48-bit issue, but I can tell you I put a 120GB IDE drive in my brother's P3-500 computer two years ago and it's been working great. I can't remember if I had to update the BIOS first or not.
Speaking as someone who has been down this road, I'd strongly advise you to think carefully about whether you really want the trouble of running two separate computers. A couple of years ago, I decided to move my drives (4x120GB) into a separate file/web server. It seemed like a great idea at the time, but in the end it wasn't worth the hassles with hardware and software as well as the extra power drain from running two computers. Also, another computer takes up a lot of space and it's annyoing to bring it along if you have to move apartments. I've since moved the drives back into my main computer and been much happier.
Could you perhaps silence your two drives somehow (e.g. suspension?) and keep them in your main system? If not, perhaps you could sell them off cheaply and buy a single 320 GB drive? I've seen the WD3200KS for $130 CAD. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this is the same model as the 500GB WD drive SPCR gave a great review of a couple of weeks ago---only lower capacity.
This is what I would do if I were you: Put some postings on local usenet newsgroups or bulletin boards. You could probably get at least $25 each for the 160GB drives and maybe $10 for the $40GB. Put the ~$50-60 toward a single, quiet, high-capacity drive and leave your main computer on 24/7 as a combined desktop/file server and be done with it.
OK, that said, if you really do want to run a separate file server, just get an old P2/P3 and don't pay more than $50. Anything more powerful is a waste of money as it won't make a difference. A motherboard that supports ATA100 on the IDE channels would be best, but ATA66 might be sufficient. Make sure the network interface is 10/100 (almost certainly will be). I don't know much about the LBA 48-bit issue, but I can tell you I put a 120GB IDE drive in my brother's P3-500 computer two years ago and it's been working great. I can't remember if I had to update the BIOS first or not.
hmm, I'm a bit puzzled by this - once you've set the server up properly it should be able to run indefinitely with only minimal interference, so the "hassles" aren't that significant in practice. A small server running headlessly (no monitor, keyboard etc) doesn't take up much room, and the power requirements are about the same as leaving a light bulb on at most. And unless you're constantly moving apartments, I don't see the mobility aspect is that much of an issue either.grosskur wrote:It seemed like a great idea at the time, but in the end it wasn't worth the hassles with hardware and software as well as the extra power drain from running two computers. Also, another computer takes up a lot of space and it's annyoing to bring it along if you have to move apartments. I've since moved the drives back into my main computer and been much happier.
A remote server is not an option in some circumstances of course, but I've found HDD noise is often particularly pernicious and difficult to deal with satisfactorily, especially when there's more than one and they're interacting with each other. If you can physically move as many drives as possible completely out of earshot it's well worth the effort IMO...
i think u have 2 (good) options..
a low PIII or p3 celeron. look around the 600mhz mark..
-very cheap
-more configurable than a 'specialised dedicated file server'; u can use it for other stuff too/later if u like.
-very easy to cool.. add a bottom of the range SoA cooler.. u almost don't need any fans
and u have the added bonus that they're highly available, and would otherwise go to waste.
OR
a p4 mobile celeron or mobile penitum 4-m.
..the latter would default to 1.2ghz (on 400fsb) without modification.. but that would be plenty. again, very cool, extremely cheap.
the usual 'problem' with these is finding a good motherboard (really) cheaply. but for a fileserver that really shouldn't be a problem; the only thing u need really is 10/100 LAN.. its when looking for ob gfx, sound, usb2, 800fsb etc.. that u'd find it less economic. again, on ebay there are usually ones with $10-15 mobos from company turn outs, which would do fine.
i suppose it depends on what u have lying around.. if u have a case, memory and PSU available, or that u could scavenge, then i'd say the mobile is the way to go- i wouldn't be suprised if it were cheaper either- the processors really are selling for tiny amounts.
if u can't scavenge that stuff (u really should be able to.. shouldn't need much ram either) then perhaps a PIII base unit with everything included may be cheaper.
i'd personally put the little bit of extra effort in for the mobile..
i dont see (once set up) how a fileserver would be more of a hassel.. if you are serving multiple computers. if u are just serving one, then perhaps u could just use firewire to move the HDDs into another room. but with many HDDs i doubt this would be much cheaper (enclosures, or atleast converters, and presumably FW card too.)
a low PIII or p3 celeron. look around the 600mhz mark..
-very cheap
-more configurable than a 'specialised dedicated file server'; u can use it for other stuff too/later if u like.
-very easy to cool.. add a bottom of the range SoA cooler.. u almost don't need any fans
and u have the added bonus that they're highly available, and would otherwise go to waste.
OR
a p4 mobile celeron or mobile penitum 4-m.
..the latter would default to 1.2ghz (on 400fsb) without modification.. but that would be plenty. again, very cool, extremely cheap.
the usual 'problem' with these is finding a good motherboard (really) cheaply. but for a fileserver that really shouldn't be a problem; the only thing u need really is 10/100 LAN.. its when looking for ob gfx, sound, usb2, 800fsb etc.. that u'd find it less economic. again, on ebay there are usually ones with $10-15 mobos from company turn outs, which would do fine.
i suppose it depends on what u have lying around.. if u have a case, memory and PSU available, or that u could scavenge, then i'd say the mobile is the way to go- i wouldn't be suprised if it were cheaper either- the processors really are selling for tiny amounts.
if u can't scavenge that stuff (u really should be able to.. shouldn't need much ram either) then perhaps a PIII base unit with everything included may be cheaper.
i'd personally put the little bit of extra effort in for the mobile..
i dont see (once set up) how a fileserver would be more of a hassel.. if you are serving multiple computers. if u are just serving one, then perhaps u could just use firewire to move the HDDs into another room. but with many HDDs i doubt this would be much cheaper (enclosures, or atleast converters, and presumably FW card too.)
Echo what Isaac said, with the addition that all the P3 boards I own have BIOS updates available that will allow 48 bit LBA. It's just one of those things you'll want to check out before you actually buy the thing: did the board support the big drives on release, and if not, did the manufacturer add support in BIOS updates. The timing is such that many manufacturers did, because you're looking at a point in time when that transition was made. And, as others have said, there are add-in cards available that won't cost any more than beer money.IsaacKuo wrote:160gig PATA drives will require 48bit LBA support. Older Pentium III motherboard BIOS's won't support 48bit LBA, but newer ones may. Any recent motherboard will have 48bit LBA support.duality wrote:what kinds of chipsets/CPUs are able to read 160GB?
None of my Pentium III machines have 48bit LBA support (3 slot-1 systems and 2 socket 370 systems).
Oh, and for what it's worth, for what you'll be using it for, a P2-450 would be sufficient. Anything else is just [potentially fun] overkill. On the other hand, older PCs are virtually certain to require an add-in card for your drives.
the VIA boards or Lex boards/barebones (Lex Neo or Lex Twister) are perfectly fine for a file server in a SoHo environment. They are highly integrated and offer everything you need. Even if you use a Gigabit Ethernet connection, you'll pump through 20-25MB/s w/o problems using standard hardware. Both, VIA and Lex are tested to run with Linux. Get Ubuntu and install Webmin. It lets you administer the entire Server through a Web interface pretty much.
The suggestet ClarkConnect is also an option as are Smoothwall or some other Firewall/Fileserver distro. They all come with nice web interfaces that are extremely easy to administer. In your case I'd get a mini ITX board and put one of these distros on. put it in the case of your likes and go serve.
Using Windows on your server will automatically increase the hardware requirements.
The suggestet ClarkConnect is also an option as are Smoothwall or some other Firewall/Fileserver distro. They all come with nice web interfaces that are extremely easy to administer. In your case I'd get a mini ITX board and put one of these distros on. put it in the case of your likes and go serve.
Using Windows on your server will automatically increase the hardware requirements.
-
- Posts: 1608
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:02 pm
- Location: United States
I'd also recommend something along the lines of a P2, P3, Celeron, etc. Shouldn't be too hard to find one of these cheap in your area, check the flea markets, garage sales, school/business auction, stuff like that. My dad actually picked up a few P2-350 desktops last year for like $10/ea. from work. Perfect for file servers, although we set them up for family members and stuff.
And it sounds like Linux will handle 48-bit addressing, so you don't even need to worry about BIOS support.
And it sounds like Linux will handle 48-bit addressing, so you don't even need to worry about BIOS support.