NAS or a home server?

[Tomsk]

Right, but i'm assuming people protect their data more than just virus protection applications?

People have got Mirror Raid setups, so theres bound to be people here with home servers that have measures of protecting the data on their hard drives - trouble is I dont know what it is they use... hence my question (i.e; certain write only access etc?)

People have differing views on virus protection, but for me, as the sole user of my PCs and server, I'm the last line of defence. As long as I don't do anything stupid, like running an unknown file, I'm unlikely to get infected.

As for backing up data. My PC's are backed up automatically by my WHS server. I also run a daily robocopy script to a desktop USB hard drive. MozyHome also runs daily backing up to a remote server. Finally I run a weekly robocopy script to a portable hard drive.

But how many drives can the NAS hold and what is the cost?

I havent researched much, but my understanding that most NAS enclosures typically house 2 drives (which isn't enough) and they cost a lot, wiping out any savings on a person's electricity bill.

This is one of the reasons I recommend a home built PC as a server. My 10 drive server draws ~140W.

lol, I've really thought about how much power computers suck until I've been researching this. Feel guilty about leaving it on overnight when doing nothing now!
Think I'm just going to go for a NAS, most likely the ReadyNas Duo but I will wait for reviews this new one by iomega, model is StorCenter ix2-200, just announced today I believe. Having a NAS running at around 30W 24/7 sounds much more green... man I'm getting old

I switch my server (and PC's) off when I'm sleeping or not at home. They're usually powered up about 8-9 hours a day.

Depends upon how many drives you need, a 4 or 5 bay NAS cost a bomb, £400-£500 and up. A 2 bay NAS is around £200 for a good one. The 2 bay NAS can hold up to a max of 4TB (2x 2TB drives) if there is no need for a mirrored RAID set up.

£175 (from OcUK, no HD's) for a basic (Linux) PC with room for 5 HD's. Unlike some NAS (especially the cheaper ones), it will probably reach network transfer speeds in excess of 90MB/sec.

 

[2StepSteve]

I will add here to the WHS suggestion

Works great and is so much more expandable than a NAS could ever be.

 

[MichaelHo]

£175 (from OcUK, no HD's) for a basic (Linux) PC with room for 5 HD's. Unlike some NAS (especially the cheaper ones), it will probably reach network transfer speeds in excess of 90MB/sec.

Where do I find this pc for £175?

 

[sunama]

You can buy a refurbished, full computer (no monitor), for around £50, from the auction site. I suppose we could get one of these and fit it with multiple hard disks. The only problem is that the PC is so old, it will be IDE, which means buying a separate Sata controller.

 

[Tomsk]

Where do I find this pc for £175?

Asus Vintage V3-P5G31 Barebones System - Intel Core 2 Duo (LGA775) £97.74
Intel Celeron E1400 2.0Ghz Dual-Core Processor (LGA775) - Retail £34.01
OCZ Platinum Revision 2 XTC 2GB (2x1GB) PC2-6400C4 Dual Channel Series (OCZ2P800R22GK) £29.99
+ shipping & VAT = £175.00
As it is that system only has 3 SATA ports but can physically hold 5 HD's.
That's the cheapest startup. There is AMD version that costs more (£200), but has 5 SATA ports.
An OS will be required.

My main PC is based on the same case. It's quite (not silent) with a stock Intel cooler. With a Q6600, 4 HDs, a DVDRW and 8GB RAM it draws ~140W on idle, peaks at ~260W at startup.

 

[ChileanLlama]

People have differing views on virus protection, but for me, as the sole user of my PCs and server, I'm the last line of defence. As long as I don't do anything stupid, like running an unknown file, I'm unlikely to get infected.

As for backing up data. My PC's are backed up automatically by my WHS server. I also run a daily robocopy script to a desktop USB hard drive. MozyHome also runs daily backing up to a remote server. Finally I run a weekly robocopy script to a portable hard drive.

Almost the same approach here. I just have 2 Windows Home Servers, one is cloned on a weekly basis to the other one. And key files backed up to a NAS once a month.

I switch my server (and PC's) off when I'm sleeping or not at home. They're usually powered up about 8-9 hours a day.

Have a look at the add-in called Lights Out. It allows you to set up the Server to hibernate or sleep when not in use, and wake up when a client needs it.

£175 (from OcUK, no HD's) for a basic (Linux) PC with room for 5 HD's. Unlike some NAS (especially the cheaper ones), it will probably reach network transfer speeds in excess of 90MB/sec.

Agreed. My NAS despite having gigabit connections is more comparable with fast ethernet speeds. It just doesn't have the CPU power or SATA bandwidth to access the disks quickly enough in the recommended 4 drive RAID5 configuration.

 

[sunama]

Have a look at the add-in called Lights Out. It allows you to set up the Server to hibernate or sleep when not in use, and wake up when a client needs it.

Can you tell me more about Light Out.

Is it software, hardware?
Links?

Thanks

 

[ChileanLlama]

It's a software addin for Windows Home Server. You should be able to find it through www.wegotserved.com

 

[booyaka]

This is the sort of thing I want.

Do you know how much power it consumes (excluding monitor)?

Right now, my main PC in the lounge sucks up power. With my adsl router, water pump, hard disks, etc, it uses just over 200W. Main PC is on 24/7.

Ideally, what I would want is for the server to be lower power, on 24/7, so that I can switch on/off my main PC when necessary and not run it 24/7.

It kind of seems unnecessary to have a watercooled, overclocked PC on 24/7.

power wise - not sure but with intel speedstep enabled (and down volted to approx 1v) and disks spin down after 15 mins no activity then it can't be that much circa 100-120w max i would think, if that! (no monitor or gfx card attached as i can access it all from my main pc)

It's on 24/7 to run back ups/access for friends and family to see pictures etc and also plan to build a small pc in the lounge to stream films/music to it (or just need to get my head round using my WD TV and get that hooked up to the network).

My main gaming pc is on/off whenever i need it so the bulk of the time it's only on about 4 hours a day.

Also consider www.freenas.org if you don't have a spare copy of windows etc - xp works fine for me, but freenas is a super little free system for servers etc.

 

[sunama]

power wise - not sure but with intel speedstep enabled (and down volted to approx 1v) and disks spin down after 15 mins no activity then it can't be that much circa 100-120w max i would think, if that! (no monitor or gfx card attached as i can access it all from my main pc)

Just to clarify: are you saying that you do not have a video card or monitor hooked upto your server? If so, then how did you initially format it, load up the OS onto it, run maintennance of the server?

 

[ChileanLlama]

You can create an unattended install disk and then Remote Desktop into it.

For WHS the pre-built units will do this from the restore media provided.

For my WHS I installed from the OEM disk with a mouse, keyboard and monitor attached. After initial setup everything can be controlled through the WHS Connector software installed on the Client machines, or by Remote Desktop Connection if you need to do something a bit more advanced.

 

[booyaka]

Just to clarify: are you saying that you do not have a video card or monitor hooked upto your server? If so, then how did you initially format it, load up the OS onto it, run maintennance of the server?

i did have a monitor and cheap £10 pci gfx card lying around to format/install it but then just unhooked the monitor and gfx card once it was up and running and now i just remote desktop to it to perform any maintenance etc on it.

It just sits in my garage quiet happy (been up and running for 2 months now) no issues at all.

 

[sunama]

OK. But what if the main OS hard disk goes down? You wont be able to remote desktop to the server and would need to add the video card back in, correct?

Also, if you don't fit a video card, doesnt your motherboard repeatedly beep or does it boot without any warning beeps?

 

[booyaka]

OK. But what if the main OS hard disk goes down? You wont be able to remote desktop to the server and would need to add the video card back in, correct?

Also, if you don't fit a video card, doesnt your motherboard repeatedly beep or does it boot without any warning beeps?

fair point i guess that "IF" the OS hard disk dies then i would just need to hook up a monitor and gfx card again (not really a huge issues tbh). Highly unlikely that it will just "die" as it's been fine for 2 months. Mate of mine has had his server up time for 14 months now

Motherboard is fine without a gfx card, i just installed all the stuff, fired it up and pull the gfx card out!!! Whether that was a good thing or not is another story!!

 

[jbloggs]

Building your own box and putting WHS on it looks really attractive, was going to buy an NAS, but now will definitely go the WHS (with LightsOut) route...

 

[ChileanLlama]

Building your own box and putting WHS on it looks really attractive, was going to buy an NAS, but now will definitely go the WHS (with LightsOut) route...

WHS doesn't need anything powerful either...I started with loads of old parts lying about.

One aspect that makes WHS attractive (to me anyway) is the way it handles the storage pool and duplication of data on separate physical disks (if you switch the feature on). You just throw a bunch of disks at it and it adds them to the overall storage pool, no need to worry about RAID and matching drive capacities - your WHS manages it all.

And because it's a PC you can more easily expand with additional IDE or SATA controller cards as you want to add more storage. In a NAS running any type of RAID you're going to be limited to the number of disks it will support and when it becomes full if you want to increase capacity you'd probably end up renewing all the disks for larger ones.

 

[sunama]

Right. Ive just checked out LightsOut (thanks for the link).

Q. I'm using my main computer as a server (to itself and to another PC in my bedroom). My main PC uses Windows Vista Ultimate (not home server). Can I use LightsOut on my main PC running Vista Ultimate?

Also, what is "special" about Windows Home Server? Could I not use Windows Vista Ultimate, instead and have all the functionality of Windows Home Server?

 

[ChileanLlama]

Right. Ive just checked out LightsOut (thanks for the link).

Q. I'm using my main computer as a server (to itself and to another PC in my bedroom). My main PC uses Windows Vista Ultimate (not home server). Can I use LightsOut on my main PC running Vista Ultimate?

Also, what is "special" about Windows Home Server? Could I not use Windows Vista Ultimate, instead and have all the functionality of Windows Home Server?

Nope, you can't use it on Vista as far as I'm aware.

A few things that make WHS better than Vista...

1. It's a subset of Windows Server 2003 which is a pretty robust OS. It also runs better on lower spec hardware.
2. Storage pool. See above.
3. Automated backup of all client PCs - will even wake clients from sleep during the backup period. Allows restore from an image across the network. The backup is cluster based too, so if you have a number of clients it only backs up the differences - keeping the storage required for backups at a reasonable size. I.e. a lot of clients will share the same OS files.
4. Users and shares is again based on Server technologies so easier to maintain and administer
5. Remote access. WHS allows you, and other users if you set it up, to log in remotely using a provided xxxx.homeserver.com address which resolves to dynamic IP addresses.
6. With PP2 and further with PP3 beta (final due this year) closer integration with Media Center/Player for sharing media files across clients.
7. WHS connector. Allows you to administer the WHS through a simple to use application on the Client - so the WHS can be hidden away and run headless.

I've no doubt all of this can be done through Linux and Vista with the right modifications and applications. What WHS does is simplify it all...

Install WHS...setup the shares...install the client software...copy your files onto it then forget about it. If you want to add more disks just plug them in and WHS will work out the storage pool without configuring arrays etc.

It's very low maintenance when compared to a traditional W2KX, Linux or even WinXP/Vista box but because it is Windows at the core you can customise it to host things like your own FTP/HTTP server, Exchange Server, Manage Downloads etc. But it is designed to run as a server, not a hybrid client/HTPC/server box - so you would need to decide if you were prepared to have a separate box for it, tucked away some place - and if you are only sharing a few files and the other features are no use to you then what you have is maybe just fine.

So if you want some of these features and don't want to spend lots of time configuring then it probably is the way to go.

 

[sunama]

Thank you.

 

[THFC]

Thanks for all the input guys, it's a really hard decision. Home server for better storage expandability and more unrestricted functions, but then a NAS for much reduced power consumption.
Keeping that I currently have a spare pc, spec of which is:
- AMD Athlon 3200+ (I think)
- 2 gig DDR ram
- Viper 500W psu.

Would I be able to use these components for the build? I'd ditch the case and motherboard as I'd want small form factor really. It's a good coolermaster as well :S

Re Nas I've narrowed it down to either the Netgear ReadyNas Duo or the Synology 209.

Would I be able to stream HD movies wirelessly at all? Or should I plan to have this system wired to the media player?

On a side note I've just manage to pick up a iomega 320gb portable HDD at one of the main supermarkets for a very good price! Sub £40. Will use this temporarily until I decide on what to do.

Interesting reading all this, I am in the same boat, needing a nas for home use but also a print server and also for using squeeze centre after xmas. The nas systems cost a lot of money for something that could do this, no expandibility and low end systems suffer from poor cpu's on squeeze centre.

looking at a windows home server too based on an intel atom 330, with 1.5tb samsung f2s in raid. Power consumption is tiny against anything else. Apparently each w used equates to £1 extra saving a year (rough guide) so the savings add up quickly on using the atom.

I already have a HTPC and gaming pc, and a windows home server along these lines seems more appealing than off the shelf NAS. Cases for an itx system seem limited on h/d capacity