Confusing my self on storage!

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
C

cpeters1965

Honorable
Aug 26, 2013
18
0
10,510
Good day unto all!
I am confusing myself and could use some help from the forum members. I have a vey large collection of movies and video and am still expanding. I want to build a simple server that can hold all of it. Everything I read says to build a NAS, which is fine except for space! I want at least 9 TB of storage (IE 3, 3tb drives)If I go NAS then using RAID I would still just have 3tb across 3 drives. What would be the easiest solution on this? It will be to be able to access from a kodi/plex server.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
utgotye

utgotye

Admirable
Jun 8, 2015
1,732
0
6,460
RAID1 provides mirroring, which is apparently not what you want. Just put together a cheap build and stuff a bunch of drives in it. For something like PLEX, i'd look at an 860K at minimum.

I'm working on something similar only I plan to run it on RAID10
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
C

cpeters1965

Honorable
Aug 26, 2013
18
0
10,510


Probably right. Part of it is Im cheap, I want every byte of storage I can get.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
T

Traciatim

Distinguished
Nov 11, 2006
2,057
0
20,460
What you are looking for is a RAID enclosure. There are many ways to go about this, like you can use external storage attached to an existing machine, build a machine dedicated to storage, or get a stand alone box that is designed just for this purpose.

For instance on Newegg they have a whole Network Attached Storage section that you can search for things like:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100008028%20600016040&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=90

For building your own you can look at things like FreeNAS that you put on a machine to run it as a storage server fairly easily:

http://www.freenas.org/

As for the storage and size, you'll probably want to stick with some sort of RAID5 or some other solution to maximize storage (Like ZFS in FreeNAS). A RAID0 is destroyed during a drive loss and all of your data would be gone, a RAID10 loses half of your storage space, where a RAID 5 you only lose one drive worth of storage while still allowing the loss of a single drive without losing data. Since you are just storing movies and similar types of data then performance shouldn't really be an issue.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I

i7Baby

Titan
BANNED
Jul 25, 2012
44,084
2
106,960



Then I'm not sure what we can do to help if you've already made up your mind.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
G

gtvr

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2009
1,166
0
19,460
RAID 5, as posted above, is your answer if you want redundancy. If you don't, you could just create a single volume and not lose any space, but be at risk of data loss. (I think it's called an extended disk in Windows - it's not a RAID format).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
utgotye

utgotye

Admirable
Jun 8, 2015
1,732
0
6,460
RAID5 still has it's dangers, namely unrecoverable read errors. For me, when putting together an array, it all comes down to what is more important: data integrity and fault tolerance or performance. I prefer to err on the side of integrity and fault tolerance most of the time. If you plan to back up your array, somewhat defeating the purpose, by all means. The beauty of RAID5 is having 3 drive capacity of a 4 drive array. With 3TB disks, after a drive failure, you have a 70+% chance of not being able to reconstruct the data due to errors.

I prefer RAID10 for small arrays. It gets me fault tolerance and performance at the cost of lower capacity, a cost I'm willing to pay with important data. It's priceless after all and drives are cheap by comparison.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom