Help with my Server Build - Page 3

If you lose your OS you don't lose your raid. At least not with ZFS, all you do is run zpool import and BLAMO its back. I have done this a few times with different hardware.

"Supported operating systems Solaris, OpenSolaris , Illumos distributions , OpenIndiana , FreeBSD, Mac OS X Server 10.5, NetBSD, Linux via ZFS-FUSE or partial native support via 3rd party kernel module[2]"

Looks *nix limited, which really only strengthens my point for why most shouldn't use it, especially here with mostly windows users.

If he uses Linux for the storage server, which isn't a bad idea, then he's good to go. If he uses Windows, it can't be done.

It's not rubbish but it is not for everyone. Software RAID (especially non-RAID RAID) can provide features that are superior to standard RAID. OS-based RAIDs is NOT necessarily a single point of failure. In fact, OS RAID is LESS of a single point of failure. If you lose a hardware or host-based controller, you need a physical replacement. In case of software RAID, you can still mount the array without very specific hardware requirements.

i.e. WHS v1 implemented Drive Extender. In case you loss the OS, you still could plug the HDDs into any other OS and access the data. DE was a translation/mapping layer that sat on top of NTFS. The common standard RAID (1,10,0+1,5,6) all rely on either just mirroring or parity.

Software RAID on the contray is used for personal and enterprise. When running a very large array (i.e. 20+ HDDS), software RAID absolutely makes sense. A general statement that software RAID is bad misses many usages where it is better.

I am quite familar with PERC 5/i and 6/i.... see my thread in my sig. However, the extra cost may not provide any real benefit to him.


Why shouldn't you use it exactly? If your OS fails, users are generally going to rebuild with the same OS.


It can be done with Windows with 3rd party non-standard RAID solutions like FlexRAID.

I know full well you know of the PERC cards, your sig reminded me of them. Those at the bottom were for the OP, not you.

And trust me, Software RAID is not used in Enterprise. 20 drive plus? That means either: the front bay drives of that 4U are all tied into one or 2 RAID cards or you're working with a SAN. You do not touch Software RAID at all, especially since it would take away precious CPU cycles.

EDIT: Hell, with 20-drive+ you aren't even looking at a Server, it's pretty much SAN or nothing.

ZFS is used in enterprise settings... ask Oracle.

For 20+ drives, you could also be looking at HBAs with software RAID.

If the server is a file server...... then CPU cycles are there for file serving!

ZFS is probably only used in FOSS shops, and not many of those I would think. 20 drive anything is more than likely going to be a SAN.

You do realise that the vast majority of servers out there run FOSS?

Agreed. Not only this, but there are PLENTY of industrial-strength Solaris installations out there running either ZFS or UFS & software RAID. Yes, you read that right. @KyadCK: Solaris is not FOSS btw, it's closed software. Additionally, many so-called SANs actually use software RAID in their operations.

KyadCK is good enough to state that he/she is looking at things from a Windows perspective, hence the (limited) perception of what is available in the marketplace and its efficacy.

This is not true. Microsoft has the largest market share in Enterprise Server Operating Systems. Unix is declining, z/OS is declining, Linux is rising...but Windows is staying pretty stable.

Now I have nothing against FOSS, but working in a Microsoft world, not many of the clients I deal with have many, if any, server OS's other than Microsoft (be it NT 4.0, 2000, 2003, 2008, 2008R2, and we are starting to roll out 2012 as well).

Well put. While Solaris itself may not be FOSS, ZFS can be used on linux distros, as thus at least some functionality crosses over.

I can say, from experience however, that many enterprise settings do not use linux or FOSS on their servers. Main reasons? FOSS does not have the support that MS or Enterprise RedHat, for example, have, same reason they buy Dell or HP and ESXi instead of build their own or use XEN. There is little to no guarantee that it will be updated with the kernel or whatever other updates are required to keep it running. Good linux programmers/operators/scripters/anything are expensive due to there being so few people who can actually do it. As much as it sounds like these massive businesses should run completely in-house everything, they don't.

As for JBOD servers... You're at 20+ drives, you might be able to fit that in a 4U, and that is if you use 2.5" drives. Otherwise you're splitting them between computers, so now you have to set up proper cross-computer mirroring and hard drive awareness, and it just gets worse the more you add. Not to mention the network connectivity requirements. You are almost guaranteed to be running a SAN by this point, not to mention the above reasons including "well it sorta broke, it's on (SAN maker)'s ass, not ours. Give em a call."

Few people are willing to pick up linux/unix skills of any kind for something as small as a file server, so arguing that software RAID is any good due to things like Solaris and ZFS is really pointless. On Windows, Software RAID is an absolute last resort, and all the more so due to on-board "Fake-RAID" being somewhat standard on most mainstream motherboards.
Edited by KyadCK - 8/22/12 at 2:34pm