XBMC NAS BOX?
#1
Okay. We need to allow a few exceptions to the search here on XBMC.ORG, NAS should be searchable.

Anyway, my XBMC box is on most of the time. I'm starting to run out of room on it's 2GB drive and on my home PC drives.

So..what I was looking at is running it as a NAS server as well. Anyone else do this? My other PC's are Windows 7.

I'm running XBMCBuntu on a M4A785-G AMD Phenom 2 with 8GB ram. Plenty of power.

How do you guys setup your home network? Your thoughts on this idea? I tried to post in off-topic, but I can't post there for whatever reason.

Thanks,
CaptnJB
Reply
#2
You can use google to search - just search for "NAS xbmc"

There's lots of different ways to do it. One of the popular ones is to build an unRAID server (as it tends to work particularly well for write-once, read a bunch media) but there's plenty of other options out there.

Cheers,
Jonathan
Always read the XBMC online-manual, FAQ and search the forum before posting.
Do not e-mail XBMC-Team members directly asking for support. Read/follow the forum rules.
For troubleshooting and bug reporting please make sure you read this first.


Image
Reply
#3
(2014-03-31, 05:38)CaptnJB Wrote: Okay. We need to allow a few exceptions to the search here on XBMC.ORG, NAS should be searchable.

Anyway, my XBMC box is on most of the time. I'm starting to run out of room on it's 2GB drive and on my home PC drives.

So..what I was looking at is running it as a NAS server as well. Anyone else do this? My other PC's are Windows 7.

I'm running XBMCBuntu on a M4A785-G AMD Phenom 2 with 8GB ram. Plenty of power.

How do you guys setup your home network? Your thoughts on this idea? I tried to post in off-topic, but I can't post there for whatever reason.

Thanks,
CaptnJB

Honestly, I think the NAS and the media player should be separate from each other. That's just how I prefer to setup most of my devices, so that I can customize each one as needed without compromise.

I currently use a PogoPlug with external hard drives as my NAS setup and it's very formidable given the size, price, and power consumption of the device. Depending on how much storage you want (let's say you only need 3 TB, or don't mind hooking up multiple external HDD's), you could go this route and it would probably work quite well for you. I needed more storage, so I am currently in the process of building a FreeNAS server so I can expand my storage without having external HDD's lying around everywhere.

At this point, I would probably convert that M4A785-G to a server (the specs say it has 5 SATA ports, and you probably have everything else you need except the hard disks themselves) and buy an NUC or other device to use as an HTPC. If you don't like the NUC, you could consider building your own mini-ITX HTPC, but the NUC is a pretty quick and easy solution IMO.

The only one rule I would say that you must abide by is to use a wired connection whenever possible. If it's not possible, make sure you have a good wireless N or AC connection that you can test for stability while streaming. In my office, my PogoPlug and FreeNAS server are connected via Gigabit ethernet. I didn't want to run a cable in my apartment and my apartment is small enough for a 5 GHz 300 Mbps N signal to stream 1080p comfortably. If you're in a bigger space, the range and stability of a wireless connection may not be strong enough.
Reply
#4
I don't understand why people always recommend separate boxes for NAS and media box when someone wants to do 2-in-1. Maybe sometimes people don't have the space or money for two dedicated units, or don't want the extra energy usage. I run a 2-in-1 and it makes no more noise than when it was media only. If built right or shouldn't make more noise. I used isolators on all the hard drive screws and built it in a nice quality heavy walled case so no extra noise from the drives. I don't use raid because I don't need it and just add drives as I need it. I have extra drives that are mirrors of the data that I keep in a safe that get updated about once a week.
Reply
#5
(2014-04-01, 02:38)LazerBlue Wrote: I don't understand why people always recommend separate boxes for NAS and media box when someone wants to do 2-in-1.

It just depends on your storage and media needs, which the OP did not specify in the original post. If you're wanting a large storage server (>6 drives) or want to be able to expand in the future, a dedicated server will be a better option. Also, you don't want to have to shut down your media player while your upgrade your server or have to fix it. If you want to utilize the storage for other computers (especially if there are going to be simultaneous connections), you don't want the load from the server aspect affecting your media playing and vice versa. I'm not saying that good hardware won't handle such a setup, but dedicated devices generally do their jobs better than convergence devices. Also, aesthetics might discourage one from using their server box as their HTPC.

There are several factors that go into it, but it all depends on the kind of setup you want, need, and can afford. Some of us would just prefer a simple RAID solution of some sort, with data redundancy, pooled disks/volumes, and disk failure tolerance. When you run the software that has all of these features available (unRAID, FreeNAS, WHS, etc), you generally can't run XBMC on top of it either. For that reason, it's better to have a separate media player and server.
Reply
#6
After 10+ years of diddling with self-built RAID arrays JOBDs and others on Linux boxes, I finally bucked out for a QNAP TS-669 Pro with 6 bays. Intel based and runs all my content gathering apps native along with being a Time Machine/rsync backup location for all my other important boxes. Best money I ever spent. It could run XBMC but as my Media room is perfectly silent, it sits upstairs in the mancave with all the other things with fans and whiring disks.
Reply
#7
(2014-04-01, 08:42)two515ty Wrote: Some of us would just prefer a simple RAID solution of some sort, with data redundancy, pooled disks/volumes, and disk failure tolerance. When you run the software that has all of these features available (unRAID, FreeNAS, WHS, etc), you generally can't run XBMC on top of it either. For that reason, it's better to have a separate media player and server.

Not to steal this thread, but can you expand on this little gem? I'm specifically planning a 2-in-1 and I had assumed that I could the hardware RAID on the motherboard I plan on buying, using debian with XBMC sitting on top of that...or maybe XBMCbuntu and then install whatever other packages I would need.

Are you saying that XBMC can't play well with an O/S that has those features installed, or the specific O/Ses that you outlined?
Reply
#8
(2014-04-01, 19:54)capslock118 Wrote:
(2014-04-01, 08:42)two515ty Wrote: Some of us would just prefer a simple RAID solution of some sort, with data redundancy, pooled disks/volumes, and disk failure tolerance. When you run the software that has all of these features available (unRAID, FreeNAS, WHS, etc), you generally can't run XBMC on top of it either. For that reason, it's better to have a separate media player and server.

Not to steal this thread, but can you expand on this little gem? I'm specifically planning a 2-in-1 and I had assumed that I could the hardware RAID on the motherboard I plan on buying, using debian with XBMC sitting on top of that...or maybe XBMCbuntu and then install whatever other packages I would need.

Are you saying that XBMC can't play well with an O/S that has those features installed, or the specific O/Ses that you outlined?

I guess I should have clarified that I was referring to certain dedicated software server solutions only, such as FreeNAS and unRAID. If you use the motherboard's hardware RAID, there wouldn't be any problem at all. Personally, I avoid hardware RAID because I don't want to worry about recovering the array if my hardware fails or if I want to upgrade/replace the hardware.

Otherwise, I don't see any issues with running XBMCbuntu/Debian with Samba and whatever other server software you need.

I don't mean to come off as just being completely against 2-in1 solutions in this thread, I just would like to recommend that people separate the functions of their hardware whenever it makes sense to do so.
Reply
#9
Hey guys,

Thank you for your replies. This is exactly the little debate I wanted.

I think what I am going to do is this: I'm going to get a stand alone raid box and plug it in either via USB or Ethernet to my NetGear router. I am also going to start playing with the R-Pi and maybe replace my HTPC box that I was thinking of multi-purposing with. I agree with the other posters on here that they should probably be stand alone devices simply because we like to play with our XBMC boxes. The other benefit being is that I use CrashPlan and will backup to that stand alone raid box and if need be, I can grab that and go and have all my data.

I appreciate all of your time.

JB
Reply

Logout Mark Read Team Forum Stats Members Help
XBMC NAS BOX?0