[steve1977]

I have a media server with 16 disks. Thinking to get a SSD card as SATA card. Besides allowing me to have 17 rather than "only" 16 disks, I would imagine some speed improvement.

I am thinking of something like this:

OCZ Technology RVD3MIX2-FHPX4-480G 3 X2 Max IOPS PCI-E Full Height 480GB SSD SATA 6.0 Gb-s Slim Revo Drive
http://www.amazon.com/OCZ-Technology-RVD...+480GB+SSD


Any thoughts or experience?

[charlie0440]

WOW you must be loaded

What exactly is the goal here, to have more disks? If so why not get something like this: http://www.amazon.com/Syba-Express-Ports...pci-e+sata

If speed is your goal, I've heard those RevoDrives are rapid but who needs that sort of speed in a server especially at $2.50 per GB

[steve1977]

What exactly is the goal here, to have more disks? If so why not get something like this: http://www.amazon.com/Syba-Express-Ports...pci-e+sata

Thanks for your message. Issue is that the case does not fit more than 16 disks, so option above would not work. You are right though that I would not spend this money with the sole objective of adding one more disk. Question is whether it brings advantage to speed as well (with the extra disk being a nice additional benefit.

If speed is your goal, I've heard those RevoDrives are rapid but who needs that sort of speed in a server especially at $2.50 per GB

Curious what exactly would get faster through an SSD sa server system drive. Boot-up for sure, but who cares. What about copying between the data disks? is it doing some "cashing" or any other reason why the system drive being SSD would make a difference? What about network traffic?

You can tell that I am quite happy with what I have, but I would not describe it as super fast. I ran out of levers to increase speed...

[TugboatBill]

The PCIe SSD drives are fast - they make good OS drives. I have one in my home system and my workstation at work. If you do any disk intensive stuff they're what you need to speed things up. However if you're using them to store shows/movies they're a waste of money.

If you're copying from one of these to a typical SSD/HDD the remote drive/network speed will determine how fast the transfer occurs. Your maximum speed is determined by the slowest link. If you're compiling code then these drives will speed that up considerably. Non disk intensive things like web browsing, email, xbmc, etc will see little to no change.

Right now I'm in the process of setting up a virtual host server that has a OCZ ZD4CM88-FH-1.6T. Blazingly fast with 1.6TB of space. How much did it cost? If you had to ask you can't afford it.

[live4ever]

It'd work nice if you run the XBMC MySQL db off of it.

[charlie0440]

To me the sensible thing to do is buy a new case. If you want a speed increase for the OS, which if it is just a media server is not necessary but I must admit I have my ubuntu server running off a SSD (normal 2.5" drive none PCIe) so I can't say it is a waste of money Also as its an operating system there is absolutely no need for 480gb

For less then the RevoDrive you have loads of options, to name a few:

1) Buy a new case. Then either get a new motherboard or some SAS cards to allow more HDD connections
2) You could even buy something like this to expand your existing setup for cheaper, not saying you should, need to check the compatibility, but you get the idea:

PCIe SAS expander
24 * 3.5" Norco case

With money left over for a PSU and hard drives

[Dougie Fresh]

You couldn't find somewhere in there to velcro a 2.5" SSD?

[T800]

It's a lot for 480GB. You could build another 16 drive server and at least half fill it with 2TB drives with that sort of money.

[steve1977]

For less then the RevoDrive you have loads of options, to name a few:

1) Buy a new case. Then either get a new motherboard or some SAS cards to allow more HDD connections
2) You could even buy something like this to expand your existing setup for cheaper, not saying you should, need to check the compatibility, but you get the idea:

PCIe SAS expander
24 * 3.5" Norco case

I was thinking about the Norco case when I bought my case. I very much like it, but still have not received any good answer how I would actually properly place it. It's not that my Tower case is particularly great given how loud and bright it is, but the Norco may be even worse? It is meant to be mounted and buying a cabinet to rack-mount the Norco appears much? If I just place it on the floor, it may not look "nice" and also not sure whether it properly keeps the dust off.

Anyhow, my main objective would be speed with one extra drive as a side product. I am stll interested in alternative case options as I am not so happy with my Tower case.

---

It's a lot for 480GB. You could build another 16 drive server and at least half fill it with 2TB drives with that sort of money.

Anyone aware of cheaper SSD PCI cards from different OEMs? Any specific suggestions?

[steve1977]

The PCIe SSD drives are fast - they make good OS drives. I have one in my home system and my workstation at work. If you do any disk intensive stuff they're what you need to speed things up. However if you're using them to store shows/movies they're a waste of money.

If you're copying from one of these to a typical SSD/HDD the remote drive/network speed will determine how fast the transfer occurs. Your maximum speed is determined by the slowest link. If you're compiling code then these drives will speed that up considerably. Non disk intensive things like web browsing, email, xbmc, etc will see little to no change.

Right now I'm in the process of setting up a virtual host server that has a OCZ ZD4CM88-FH-1.6T. Blazingly fast with 1.6TB of space. How much did it cost? If you had to ask you can't afford it.

Thanks for your message. Seeing two people in this thread actually having a SSD for their OS drive gives me some confidence that my ideas is not completely off. I am still not sure. Few more things for my user behaviors:

1) I am not compiling any code and also do not use the my-SQL database yet. If/once XBMC ever implements a plex-like server-client solution, this will change and I would put the XBMC server on the media server, but if this never happens, I won't use it to stora my-sql (don't like the current solution)

2) The drive will only store the OS and is NOT meant to store movies or shows. I may temporarily store sabnzbd downloads until I move them to the data drives

3) Main use of the OS drive will be sabnzbd, CP, SB and hosting an apache server, which allows me to access maraschino and constellation away from home (through reverse proxies). I am not sure what role the OS drive plays when I stream from the data disks and/or access even other computers through the web. Also not clear whether thing get faster if I stream from data drive A to data drive B.


Any further thoughts?

[Dougie Fresh]

I've found the SSD in my server makes connecting to it remotely much faster.

[TugboatBill]

The PCIe SSD drives are fast - they make good OS drives. I have one in my home system and my workstation at work. If you do any disk intensive stuff they're what you need to speed things up. However if you're using them to store shows/movies they're a waste of money.

If you're copying from one of these to a typical SSD/HDD the remote drive/network speed will determine how fast the transfer occurs. Your maximum speed is determined by the slowest link. If you're compiling code then these drives will speed that up considerably. Non disk intensive things like web browsing, email, xbmc, etc will see little to no change.

Right now I'm in the process of setting up a virtual host server that has a OCZ ZD4CM88-FH-1.6T. Blazingly fast with 1.6TB of space. How much did it cost? If you had to ask you can't afford it.

Thanks for your message. Seeing two people in this thread actually having a SSD for their OS drive gives me some confidence that my ideas is not completely off. I am still not sure. Few more things for my user behaviors:

1) I am not compiling any code and also do not use the my-SQL database yet. If/once XBMC ever implements a plex-like server-client solution, this will change and I would put the XBMC server on the media server, but if this never happens, I won't use it to stora my-sql (don't like the current solution)

2) The drive will only store the OS and is NOT meant to store movies or shows. I may temporarily store sabnzbd downloads until I move them to the data drives

3) Main use of the OS drive will be sabnzbd, CP, SB and hosting an apache server, which allows me to access maraschino and constellation away from home (through reverse proxies). I am not sure what role the OS drive plays when I stream from the data disks and/or access even other computers through the web. Also not clear whether thing get faster if I stream from data drive A to data drive B.


Any further thoughts?

Plex client/server doesn't appear to be the future for XBMC. XBMC Mesh.

How much improvement will you see? It depends on the hardware in your server. If the constraint you have is the CPU, then a fast PCIe card will do little. A slow MB, limited/slow ram, slow network connection, etc can make what ever improvements by the PCIe be so small you won't notice. These devices are really for those that are trying to get every last little bit of performance. I do believe that in the next few years these will become more and more popular, eventually most PCs sold will come with them already installed. The next step would then be to fully integrate them onto the MB.

As for copying from Drive A to Drive B.
Drive A and Drive B are both 5900RPM(75IOPS) drives - copy speed will be less than 75 IOPS
Drive A is a 5900rpm(75IOPS) and Drive B is a 15000rpm(200IOPS) - copy speed will be nearly 75 IOPS
Drive A is a 5900rpm(75IOPS) and Drive B is a OCZ Vertex 4 (120000IOPS) - copy speed will be nearly 75 IOPS

Drive B doesn't really have much effect on speed because drive A is so slow the computer spends all its time waiting for Drive A.

[steve1977]

I've found the SSD in my server makes connecting to it remotely much faster.

This is exactly the type of insight / experience I am looking for. Would be great to understand why this is the case though? As some of the other posts show, the OS drive should not be the bottleneck for speed, but rather the (W)LAN speed and the speed of the storage disks (which would remain "normal" disks".

Sorry for asking so many questions, but really like to understand the impact before spending so much money!

---

Plex client/server doesn't appear to be the future for XBMC. XBMC Mesh.

Thanks for pointing me to the article, very exciting to eventually see this coming alive.

I took away from the article that the XBMC Mesh may still have some form server structure:

> Would you still have to share your local content over something like SMB, or would you install XBMC on your local content server(s) and make it(them) act as
> uPnP servers for the mesh? Would it be better for there to be a shared database that each software instance latched onto while it was in the network, or would it
> be better for each instance to write to its own database? Or could you do both, so that the library immediately appears on your device via the shared database,
> but a redundant local database is written in the background while your CPU is idle or you are watching a movie or something?

I am still hoping that there will be some form of implementation of the XBMC Mesh, which will allow me accessing the database and watching transcoded movies away from home.

And then, the SSD investment may also have its merits?

[Dougie Fresh]

This is exactly the type of insight / experience I am looking for. Would be great to understand why this is the case though? As some of the other posts show, the OS drive should not be the bottleneck for speed, but rather the (W)LAN speed and the speed of the storage disks (which would remain "normal" disks".

Sorry for asking so many questions, but really like to understand the impact before spending so much money!

I am not sure why it makes a difference (I've even been told it should not) but it does.

However, know this is just with a cheap Kingston V100 64GB SSD.

[steve1977]

I am not sure why it makes a difference (I've even been told it should not) but it does.

However, know this is just with a cheap Kingston V100 64GB SSD.

Thanks, I am tempted to pull the trigger and buy one of the cards with SSD. It may unleash a significant speed improvement.

Also, it is "safer" as an SSD drive is much less likely to get corrupted or die, isn't it?