XBMC Community Forum
Looking to Build Your Very First unRAID Server? - Printable Version

+- XBMC Community Forum (http://forum.xbmc.org)
+-- Forum: Help and Support (/forumdisplay.php?fid=33)
+--- Forum: Hardware for Kodi (/forumdisplay.php?fid=112)
+--- Thread: Looking to Build Your Very First unRAID Server? (/showthread.php?tid=104489)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15


RE: Looking to Build Your Very First unRAID Server? - eskro - 2012-04-24 21:02

if your using your unRAID just to act as a NAS, u dont need more then the SEMPRON...
its when u start to install unRAID addons to do more like SICK COUCH SAB,
u need a stronger CPU


RE: Looking to Build Your Very First unRAID Server? - Beer40oz - 2012-04-25 07:15

(2012-04-24 21:02)eskro Wrote:  if your using your unRAID just to act as a NAS, u dont need more then the SEMPRON...
its when u start to install unRAID addons to do more like SICK COUCH SAB,
u need a stronger CPU

your right......

anyways I have my desktop pc for that other stuff.....

Big Grin

I recommend unraid very very much.... time to buy a lic for more HD'sBig Grin


RE: Looking to Build Your Very First unRAID Server? - mattchapman - 2012-04-25 20:01

Hi
I'm looking to build my own NAS for XBMC and came across UnRaid which appears to be very popular among XBMC users. At the same time I'm reading that Windows 8 has "unraid" built in with some added benefits (3TB support, faster read/write...). I am by no means an expert on this but wanted to hear some viewpoints as to whether it's worth investing in UnRaid now or waiting for Win 8 (arrives this summer?).

Thanks


RE: Looking to Build Your Very First unRAID Server? - Beer40oz - 2012-04-26 17:20

(2012-04-25 20:01)mattchapman Wrote:  Hi
I'm looking to build my own NAS for XBMC and came across UnRaid which appears to be very popular among XBMC users. At the same time I'm reading that Windows 8 has "unraid" built in with some added benefits (3TB support, faster read/write...). I am by no means an expert on this but wanted to hear some viewpoints as to whether it's worth investing in UnRaid now or waiting for Win 8 (arrives this summer?).

Thanks

http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=17687.0

google is your friend!

I am sticking with unraid....

I think you will find more answers on lime technology


RE: Looking to Build Your Very First unRAID Server? - ivseenbetter - 2012-04-29 18:51

What are the major advantages of using a server install like Unraid? Right now I serve everything out from an HTPC (i3 2100t based) that is also running XBMC to my other htpc/xbmc locations...all running W7. Am I missing something that should make me consider having a NAS like Unraid?


RE: Looking to Build Your Very First unRAID Server? - eskro - 2012-04-29 19:56

well yeah, when you'll run out of space on your hdd's,
what will u do?

unRAID acts as a big hard drive
and u can add more hdd to it to grow the space when needed.


RE: Looking to Build Your Very First unRAID Server? - ivseenbetter - 2012-04-29 21:23

I figured I would add another drive with a new "video" share. Xbmc will see it as a single library right?

I am probably over simplifying this. I am seriously considering building an unfair server but I need to figure out how to pitch it to the spouse better than just thinking it will be a neat project I want to try.


RE: Looking to Build Your Very First unRAID Server? - Diggs - 2012-05-01 03:51

The advantage of Unraid or any RAID setup is redundancy. I have a lot of time invested in my media library and if a drive fails, then I get to do all the work over again to get it back onto a drive from either BR or DVD. With Unraid, if I lose that drive then I pull it from the server, drop a new one in and it will rebuild the failed drive. While the rebuild of the failed drive isn't quick, it is certainly simple and quicker than repopulated the drive by ripping the data again. The reason I chose to go with Unraid over a traditional raid array was the way it writes data to the drives. There is no stripe set across all the drives, so if I lose 2 drives I can still read the data off the remaining drives. If I went with a RAID 5 setup and lost 2 drives, then all the data is gone.

Raid is not a backup, you need a duplicate copy off site in order to achieve a full on backup solution, but it does add a big layer of security for your data where using drives on a windows 7 setup with no RAID offers no redundancy at all.


RE: Looking to Build Your Very First unRAID Server? - mattchapman - 2012-05-01 16:38

(2012-05-01 03:51)Diggs Wrote:  The advantage of Unraid or any RAID setup is redundancy. I have a lot of time invested in my media library and if a drive fails, then I get to do all the work over again to get it back onto a drive from either BR or DVD. With Unraid, if I lose that drive then I pull it from the server, drop a new one in and it will rebuild the failed drive. While the rebuild of the failed drive isn't quick, it is certainly simple and quicker than repopulated the drive by ripping the data again. The reason I chose to go with Unraid over a traditional raid array was the way it writes data to the drives. There is no stripe set across all the drives, so if I lose 2 drives I can still read the data off the remaining drives. If I went with a RAID 5 setup and lost 2 drives, then all the data is gone.

Raid is not a backup, you need a duplicate copy off site in order to achieve a full on backup solution, but it does add a big layer of security for your data where using drives on a windows 7 setup with no RAID offers no redundancy at all.

I thought UnRaid can only recover from a single drive loss which it then rebuilds using the Parity drive.?


RE: Looking to Build Your Very First unRAID Server? - ivseenbetter - 2012-05-02 02:04

(2012-05-01 03:51)Diggs Wrote:  The advantage of Unraid or any RAID setup is redundancy. I have a lot of time invested in my media library and if a drive fails, then I get to do all the work over again to get it back onto a drive from either BR or DVD. With Unraid, if I lose that drive then I pull it from the server, drop a new one in and it will rebuild the failed drive. While the rebuild of the failed drive isn't quick, it is certainly simple and quicker than repopulated the drive by ripping the data again. The reason I chose to go with Unraid over a traditional raid array was the way it writes data to the drives. There is no stripe set across all the drives, so if I lose 2 drives I can still read the data off the remaining drives. If I went with a RAID 5 setup and lost 2 drives, then all the data is gone.

Raid is not a backup, you need a duplicate copy off site in order to achieve a full on backup solution, but it does add a big layer of security for your data where using drives on a windows 7 setup with no RAID offers no redundancy at all.

I see. Good info. Thanks.

I keep hoping I can find info that proves unraid is a "green" solution but assume it would use the same amount of wattage as the win 7 box if I am using the same hardware.


RE: Looking to Build Your Very First unRAID Server? - Diggs - 2012-05-02 22:01

(2012-05-01 16:38)mattchapman Wrote:  
(2012-05-01 03:51)Diggs Wrote:  The advantage of Unraid or any RAID setup is redundancy. I have a lot of time invested in my media library and if a drive fails, then I get to do all the work over again to get it back onto a drive from either BR or DVD. With Unraid, if I lose that drive then I pull it from the server, drop a new one in and it will rebuild the failed drive. While the rebuild of the failed drive isn't quick, it is certainly simple and quicker than repopulated the drive by ripping the data again. The reason I chose to go with Unraid over a traditional raid array was the way it writes data to the drives. There is no stripe set across all the drives, so if I lose 2 drives I can still read the data off the remaining drives. If I went with a RAID 5 setup and lost 2 drives, then all the data is gone.

Raid is not a backup, you need a duplicate copy off site in order to achieve a full on backup solution, but it does add a big layer of security for your data where using drives on a windows 7 setup with no RAID offers no redundancy at all.

I thought UnRaid can only recover from a single drive loss which it then rebuilds using the Parity drive.?

That is correct, it can only rebuild one drive from the parity drive. However, if you should lose 2 drives the other drives are still readable unlike having a traditional RAID 5 setup where you need a functioning array to read any data from any of the drives. My setup is using 5 drives currently and will be expanded to 6 in the near future. If 2 of the drives should fail, one being the parity drive, then the 4 drives of data are still usable. If I lost 2 data drives, then I should still be able to read the data from the remaining 2 drives and if I remember correctly, the parity drive would still rebuild one of the two lost drives. RAID 5 can't do that, at least that is my understanding. Someone correct me if that is not correct.



(2012-05-02 02:04)ivseenbetter Wrote:  
(2012-05-01 03:51)Diggs Wrote:  The advantage of Unraid or any RAID setup is redundancy. I have a lot of time invested in my media library and if a drive fails, then I get to do all the work over again to get it back onto a drive from either BR or DVD. With Unraid, if I lose that drive then I pull it from the server, drop a new one in and it will rebuild the failed drive. While the rebuild of the failed drive isn't quick, it is certainly simple and quicker than repopulated the drive by ripping the data again. The reason I chose to go with Unraid over a traditional raid array was the way it writes data to the drives. There is no stripe set across all the drives, so if I lose 2 drives I can still read the data off the remaining drives. If I went with a RAID 5 setup and lost 2 drives, then all the data is gone.

Raid is not a backup, you need a duplicate copy off site in order to achieve a full on backup solution, but it does add a big layer of security for your data where using drives on a windows 7 setup with no RAID offers no redundancy at all.

I see. Good info. Thanks.

I keep hoping I can find info that proves unraid is a "green" solution but assume it would use the same amount of wattage as the win 7 box if I am using the same hardware.

Unraid is simply an operating system. While I haven't played around with the energy settings, I think you will find the hardware used will make a larger impact on the amount of power used. I am pretty sure you can adjust the time before the array spins down, which is likely the biggest consumer of power in my server. I just left mine at the default settings, and have only had it running for a few weeks now. It's great having one share on XBMC for movies and one for TV instead of having them spread across multiple locations. I just returned from vacation and this weekend I hope to install MySQL onto the Unraid server so all my XBMC HTPCs will have one database to flow from. Watched and unwatched and resume points should be the same throughout the house after that, as well as the actual settings of XBMC so each system has the same skin and layout. Change to one, changes all of them.


RE: Looking to Build Your Very First unRAID Server? - bigdog66 - 2012-05-02 22:56

(2012-05-01 16:38)mattchapman Wrote:  
(2012-05-01 03:51)Diggs Wrote:  The advantage of Unraid or any RAID setup is redundancy. I have a lot of time invested in my media library and if a drive fails, then I get to do all the work over again to get it back onto a drive from either BR or DVD. With Unraid, if I lose that drive then I pull it from the server, drop a new one in and it will rebuild the failed drive. While the rebuild of the failed drive isn't quick, it is certainly simple and quicker than repopulated the drive by ripping the data again. The reason I chose to go with Unraid over a traditional raid array was the way it writes data to the drives. There is no stripe set across all the drives, so if I lose 2 drives I can still read the data off the remaining drives. If I went with a RAID 5 setup and lost 2 drives, then all the data is gone.

Raid is not a backup, you need a duplicate copy off site in order to achieve a full on backup solution, but it does add a big layer of security for your data where using drives on a windows 7 setup with no RAID offers no redundancy at all.

I thought UnRaid can only recover from a single drive loss which it then rebuilds using the Parity drive.?
It can only recover "ALL" data from a single drive failure but you don't lose all data if more than one goes down...you only lose the data from the multiple drives that failed....your data on the other drives are still intact
(2012-05-02 02:04)ivseenbetter Wrote:  
(2012-05-01 03:51)Diggs Wrote:  The advantage of Unraid or any RAID setup is redundancy. I have a lot of time invested in my media library and if a drive fails, then I get to do all the work over again to get it back onto a drive from either BR or DVD. With Unraid, if I lose that drive then I pull it from the server, drop a new one in and it will rebuild the failed drive. While the rebuild of the failed drive isn't quick, it is certainly simple and quicker than repopulated the drive by ripping the data again. The reason I chose to go with Unraid over a traditional raid array was the way it writes data to the drives. There is no stripe set across all the drives, so if I lose 2 drives I can still read the data off the remaining drives. If I went with a RAID 5 setup and lost 2 drives, then all the data is gone.

Raid is not a backup, you need a duplicate copy off site in order to achieve a full on backup solution, but it does add a big layer of security for your data where using drives on a windows 7 setup with no RAID offers no redundancy at all.

I see. Good info. Thanks.

I keep hoping I can find info that proves unraid is a "green" solution but assume it would use the same amount of wattage as the win 7 box if I am using the same hardware.

While up and running I don't see a way it could use less energy.....but you setup in the software an idle time that the hard drives would spin down....and only the drive that is needed would spin up if you were to watch a movie or something
although another issue is when you access your library in xbmc your media is spread across many hard drives so you could spin up your drives by browsing through your collection....but this can also be worked around by using "cache dirs" i believe....which basically you tell cache dirs which directories you want stored in cache and if you have enough ram then you could browse through your whole collection without the need to spin up any drives


RE: Looking to Build Your Very First unRAID Server? - ClayM - 2012-05-06 20:39

A couple questions -

If I'm using the unRaid box as more than just a file server, (couchpotato, sabnzbd+, etc) what should I bump that Sempron 145 up to?

With the unRaid plugins for those apps, are they kept current? Does it pull off github or whatever or do I have to wait for somebody to update the addon?

If there's another web app I wanted to use, like maraschino (http://www.maraschinoproject.com/) can I install that?


RE: Looking to Build Your Very First unRAID Server? - joe_sun - 2012-05-07 05:02

What do you think about this motherboard?

http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?InvtId=A74GA

$37.99

Realtek RTL811D

6 Serial ATA ports


RE: Looking to Build Your Very First unRAID Server? - Mick1152 - 2012-05-07 15:49

(2012-05-07 05:02)joe_sun Wrote:  What do you think about this motherboard?
http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?InvtId=A74GA
$37.99
Realtek RTL811D
6 Serial ATA ports

Seems like a great price, plus 6 SATA ports looks like it would be an awesome board for an unRAID server. I actually have a spare processor that will work in that board, I'm going to order one and see if there are any problems with it. Since it's an older board, I'm hoping there aren't any issues with larger drives like my 3TB drives.