Building personal servers

[Karim]

I've been thinking about this more than usual lately; it might be getting close to that time. But I've always run already-built servers and never put together one myself. I basically just want to put something together that's going to work for me long-term as a multimedia server. Something I can rip music onto in FLAC and DVDs onto in XviD.

With what I know, the best I can come up with is six (or four... meh) 500GB/16MB Barracudas (I'm a data packrat, especially media) in RAID 1+0. Not sure. I also can't decide between dealing with my inexperience with Linux by forcing myself to use it, or going the easy (and secure) route with 64-bit Server 2003. I suppose I'd use the unit more like a PC than a terminal-server-in-a-closet-somewhere type of deal, using the unit itself to rip DVDs and what have you.

Thoughts?? Do I need Opteron? Or dual-processor/dual-core? Are there server-specific motherboards I should be looking at? Should I be thinking about parity instead of (striped) mirroring?

[SamuraiCatJB]

when you start asking how many processors you need to ask yourself a few new questions, same with RAID decisions.

First off, multi-processors. File sharing and streaming uses about 10% average use of a single processor, even if you add RAID you only run it up to 13%. So the question comes how much do you intend to do simultaneously on the machine.

You talk about a multi-media file serving and Ripping, will you do both operations simultaneously? Any other operations at the same time? One operation, unless redesigned for parallel threads (which few are yet), can only occupy a single processor/core/logical-processor. If you only plan to rip one CD or DVD at a time, plus file sharing and streaming, that comes out to about 113% of a single processor, or 57% of a dual core (or dual processor -- but dual core will be cheaper). I haven't heard any operation that will take this design to a dual processor and dual core (dual opteron dual core), so unless you can add some operations you are looking at wasting a lot of money until software reaches better multi-threaded status.

You may be prepared to wait, I don't know. When DVD burning becomes multi-threaded to a full SMP parallel design, you could easily use all 4 cores of an dual/dual design. But that money will be wasted probably for the first year, so you might be better buying a dual board, single chip with dual core, to expand later when prices are lower and designs can utilize the extra power. Or if you really have other actions you intend to do simultaneously. Folding, game playing, streaming to multiple machines, mult-user, remote terminal access, etc.

RAID... First recognize you are opening up a full can of worms. Raid 1+0 uses the most disks in the most secure environment with fastest access. The question of parity arrays begs the next question, how much speed do you need? RAID designs always have to bottleneck at the IO channel. So a single RAID 0 can achieve a maximum theoretical throughput of 300mb/s on a SATA II channel, 320mb/s on a SCSI channel. If you are doing RAID 1+0 or 53 or any multi-RAID design, you want dual channel or you shoot yourself in the foot.

I'll give you an example.... you have a Single channel 4 disk SATA II solution, you decide to go 1+0 for speed. You combine two RAIDS of 1 into a RAID of 0. So data streams down at a maximum bandwidth of 300mb, is divided to each RAID 0 set, which is divided to each RAID 1 set. but all the decision making is happening on the same channel I/O controller. Multiple channel solution means that you can put the RAID 0 disks on multiple channels, but sometimes can mean that you have to do the final mirror in software (not always, some controllers will identify that they can do a multi-channel RAID from a single controller).

Parity choices get into mult-user requirements. RAID 3 is a secure RAID and you can RAID them together in mirrors too. But RAID 3 is not designed for multiple users. Random access speeds in striped disks are poor and RAID 3 is ultimately a striped solution (and all parity is on a single drive). It would mean that you could do a six disk solution, with the storage output of a 4 disk solution. The question comes in what do you want to happen when a disk fails? And how much are you willing to spend in tradeoff between access time or money for the solution.

I like RAID 1+0 and will probably put one together at home next year. But I usually have a bit more money to throw at systems when I do an upgrade. I just ordered my dual-core 7800 upgrade. But it has enough 5.25 slots on the case to do my future RAID, so I have a lot to expand into. I "might" do a 50/53 solution, but that requires a minimum of 6 disks. But I am the only user, so multi-user needs do not concern me. I need speed and reliability. A RAID 50 solution means good speed and a little more security than 1+0.

As far as server software goes, how many people are going to be using this? is this a company server, family server? Will you serve websites and ftp to multiple users? will you be running database serving? So the question is, are you really going to use the multi-user secure environments of 2003 server edition, or are you just an advanced XP Pro user? What exactly is the server OS going to be providing to you and the outside world?

[JAmerican]

I have 2 of everything for my PC. 2 processors, 2 hard drives, 2 floppy, 2 CD, Dual Video Output. I use my PC for Remote Desktop connections but that's it. My PC takes too much power. I have a 400W power supply in it.

JAmerican

[SamuraiCatJB]

I have 2 of everything for my PC. 2 processors, 2 hard drives, 2 floppy, 2 CD, Dual Video Output. I use my PC for Remote Desktop connections but that's it. My PC takes too much power. I have a 400W power supply in it.

JAmerican

very true, but with dual core now, no one needs to think about dual processor unless they need 4 cores. :) of course then you could have two processors and two cores in each processor. :)

[Karim]

You talk about a multi-media file serving and Ripping, will you do both operations simultaneously?

I doubt it. But at the same time, I don't want to be hindered whenever I happen to. I'm a single 22-year-old who wishes he had a family of his own, so while I don't need a family media server with support for multiple simultaneous users, I dream about needing it.

I guess that means I don't need it. lol.

I haven't heard any operation that will take this design to a dual processor and dual core (dual opteron dual core), so unless you can add some operations you are looking at wasting a lot of money until software reaches better multi-threaded status.

You may be prepared to wait, I don't know. When DVD burning becomes multi-threaded to a full SMP parallel design, you could easily use all 4 cores of an dual/dual design. But that money will be wasted probably for the first year, so you might be better buying a dual board, single chip with dual core, to expand later when prices are lower and designs can utilize the extra power. Or if you really have other actions you intend to do simultaneously. Folding, game playing, streaming to multiple machines, mult-user, remote terminal access, etc.

Well, yeah lol. Although, remote terminal access is something I do think about. I really just wondered if SMP itself added anything to RAID performance.

Your questions answered mine (by making me think). So thanks. What do you think of XP Media Center as a server OS? With your media center extenders and what have you, I'd think it would be a decent idea. And how the hell does someone shop for single- and multi-channel RAID chipsets? Newegg doesn't even get that specific.

[SamuraiCatJB]

well, ultimately you can run software striping using Windows, it is perhaps the easiest operation and windows overhead is minimal. SATA is multi-channel, inherantly, but then you need to pay attention to speed of the controller. Most SATA II controllers need to be 133Mhz capable, where-as SATA I can survive at 66Mhz. Look for things like "supports multiple controllers" and check reviews online. This way you can put in two controllers for up to 8 disks, and RAID one set on controller, RAID another set on the other controller and then use Windows disk manager to stripe them in RAID0. RAID 0 is cheap because it is only a split of data one to each drive, RAID 1 doubles the data by mirroring it so is best handled by a controller. So any +0 setup can be handled by windows. But some reviews of Promise fasttrak products show better than expected performance of 5 and 50 designs. So look at the reviews for the specifics of the design you want.

At work we pretty much buy Adaptec for SCSI RAIDs and Promise for SATA RAIDs, but at work we are only doing Raid 0,1, or 10. I think MIS might use Raid 5, but I don't talk enough with them.

If you start looking at business reviews rather than home reviews you start finding places like: http://www.broadcom.com/products/Enterprise-Small-Office/Storage-Solutions/BC4852

[Karim]

So using Windows to zero-stripe three hardware-RAID-1's is better than doing both 1 and 0 with hardware? Or is it just easier/cheaper? PCI-Express cards are twice as much as their counterparts! And that's twice an already high price... $250 - $300 for one of these things... Terrible, lol. I see why RAID on the motherboard was a big deal at first, no?

[SamuraiCatJB]

Yup, that is why built in RAIDs are a big deal. You will expect to pay about $200 or more for a decent RAID card. I am still looking, but there was an article I read recently comparing performance of motherboard RAID (Intel) to card RAID and the CPU overhead and performance was higher on the card. But I can't find it to find out which card.

If you get a card capable of doing hardware 1+0, test it with HDTach which will give you the cpu overhead and the throughput. Then you can try the half-n-half hardware mirror and OS stripe.

[Karim]

The Asus K8N-DL runs $270 at Newegg; dual Opteron with 4 SATA300 ports, 2 on 2 controllers. NVRAID tests very well in the reviews I've read, so it sounds good. I think this is what I would settle for. I don't like the idea of being limited to 4 disks, but then again I can't think of a real reason I'd need more. http://usa.asus.com/prog/spec.asp?m=K8N-DL&langs=09

[SamuraiCatJB]

you can always add another controller later, so you aren't limited. :)

I have my computer at work, xeon with *gag* only 2 SATA, but its focus was SCSI so.... anyhow, I added the second SATA controller easier than we have ever been able to add an extra SCSI controller. It was painless. Either I was lucky or people have been working to make extensions like this easier.

[Karim]

you can always add another controller later, so you aren't limited. :)

You're a genius!

I don't think I could use Linux on a machine like this, lol. I'd probably want to use it as my main desktop at first! Can't say I want to do that while learning the OS that's on it, lol.

I still haven't been sold on the whole SLI concept.

I also think this motherboard would be a good as a cheaper solution http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813130491

Same 2 x 2 SATA NVRAID setup, but for S939 Athlon.

[SamuraiCatJB]

That is similar to mine, I ordered the Platinum SLI http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813130487

And I ordered the midrange dual core 4400 x2. that gives me enough SATA for now, and I will probably extend it later. But that also gives me the option of adding a second graphics card later (or other PCIex devices -- physics processor?)

SLI is expensive. I would never buy it outright... but I might use it to skip a generation. Buy one graphics card now, when next gen comes out, buy second of same card rather than next-gen card and get it cheap, and get almost the same output. Then replace both at generation after.

[Karim]

Yeah, but the support seems razor-thin. It's basically to the point where Nvidia has to program the SLI every time a game comes out. It's not like back in the 3DFX SLI days when 3DFX was king and even had their own graphics API. Games came out supporting SLI by default, lol. I might be sold on SLI once they really get 3D screen spanning down. That would be an interesting feature. Nobody cares about it though, lol.

What size HDDs do you use? I wanted a whole hell of a lot of storage, but 500GB drives have bad prices. It looks like 250GB is the price point right now.

[SamuraiCatJB]

I haven't replaced all my drives at home, I run OS boot on a 74gig raptor and run two 200gig drives (bought under price point last year). I will probably be upgrading to either 250gig Sata II drives (a little above price point) or 400gig SATA I drives (a little more above price point). Drives I won't upgrade until late this year. I am spending enough replacing the foundation of the computer, motherboard, memory, graphics, and processor.

There has been some rumors that both a PCIx and PCI-ex co-processor physics board will be released that the SLI (dual PCI-ex) still is a favorable motherboard even if SLI never surfaces, I keep my options open. Plus it had the better sound options too, so there are several reasons for upping my choice to the SLI board even if I never use SLI.

[Karim]

That's a good point. Aren't a lot of PCI-Ex x16 slots implemented in a way that makes them graphics-only, though?

I wanted to use a Raptor for the OS, too! But the boards only have four SATA connectors and I want to use them for the 1+0 setup! I don't know what to do!

[SamuraiCatJB]

no, they are not graphics only, but no one has used them for other than graphics. However SLI boards are 8x in 16x slots (or 16x when using one card). No one has been able to achieve dual 16x speeds yet. Those should hit this winter or next spring.

I separate OS from data so I can do multi-boot. So I don't have any computers work or home that use RAID for boot. There are also the issues of recovery, compatiblity and upgrading when you use RAID for a boot. I do not recommend it myself. Use single Raptor for boot, or two for dual boot if you are as crazy as me (actually mine are 74gig windows and 37gig Linux) and run them on the non-RAID Sata channels. Then you can run the RAID on the RAID channels. Or buy a raid controller to give you 1+0 on board for 4 drives, run the OS boot off motherboard, and RAID on extra controller.

[Karim]

Well I was just going to use an IDE HDD for the OS because the whole point of the motherboard for me is the hardware 1+0. I prefer to use a fast disk for the OS so it's a bit bothersome.

[SamuraiCatJB]

IDE is slow, I've moved all mine into USB cases, or they died on me... I was going to say I was considering using my old IDE drives to build a RAID, but I forgort I inventoried them and all had failed. I replaced my 300gig under warrenty and got a nicer USB case for it. But I am strictly a SATA for new stuff, much faster.

[Karim]

Problem solved! Why didn't you tell me the one you picked has two extra SATA ports! lol!

Sweet. I found an EPoX board with that same setup, cheaper too, but I don't like it.

[SamuraiCatJB]

Problem solved! Why didn't you tell me the one you picked has two extra SATA ports! lol!

Sweet. I found an EPoX board with that same setup, cheaper too, but I don't like it.


cheaper and more ports but you don't like it? well, there are other manufacturers, Asus, Soyo and others. The local shop sells mostly msi, so that was why I chose this one. Since I get trade-in credit on upgrades, the difference in price works its way out through the system. And someone gets my cheap trade-ins.

[Karim]

I meant I didn't like the board from EPoX. I love MSI motherboards, and basically picked the one you picked. I just feel that the EPoX is cheaper for a reason. I don't really look at prices the same way a lot of people do. I mainly look at what it is I want instead. But you're right, what is pretty much the ASUS version of the board you picked has 4 SATA-300 ports w/ NVRAID and 4 SATA-150 ports w/ a Silicon Image RAID controller and is $165 at Mwave http://www.mwave.com/mwave/viewspec.hmx?scriteria=BA20954

That, I like. ECS has a 4xSATA-II/2xSATA-I non-SLI Nforce4 setup that's $99 on Newegg. That's pretty sweet money-wise.

I couldn't go through with this in good conscience unless I got a better job (read: income), though. :p

[Karim]

I think what I would do is this:


CPU:
AMD K8 3700+ 1MB S939 ($323)
Mobo:
ECS KN-1 Extreme, Nforce4 w/ NVRAID/SATA-II x 4, SiS RAID/SATA-I x 2 ($99)
RAM:
Dual Channel Corsair 1GB x 2 = 2GB DDR400 CL2.5 ($180)
GPU:
GeForce 6600 GT PCIE-X16 128MB DDR3 by Gigabyte ($162)
HDD:
OS/App: 2 x 74GB 10,000RPM WD Raptor SATA = 148GB RAID0 ($364)
Storage: 4 x 250GB 7200RPM Maxtor 16MB cache SATA-II = 500GB RAID10 ($504)
DVDRW:
NEC Dual-layer DVD+/-RW 16x ($40)
PSU:
Ultra X-Connect 500W ($80)
Case:
Don't know yet. Some kind of Lian-Li.
Cooling:
Front: Thermaltake Thunderblade A1927 120mm case fan ($8.99)
Rear: Zalman ZM-F1 80mm case fan ($4.49)
Rear: Zalman ZM-F1 80mm case fan ($4.49)
CPU: retail fan included
Monitor:
maybe this one

TOTAL $1770 (needs a case)

[SamuraiCatJB]

hmmmm... You can't really go terribly wrong with a Lian-Li case. I am getting a Thermaltake Armor case. But there is a specific reason I am getting it, all the 5.25" drives down the front. If I convert every two to 3 SATA removable drives as I grow, I have lots of room for growth. I have already overgrown 4 x 5.25 on normal case designs so I am into the tower designs for drives. This case gives me more room to grow. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16811133154

My suggestion on a case is A) write down what you like astheticly (simplicity vs. gawdy), if you like disco, you can even get disco accessories. B) write down all your drives and decide internal vs external. After that compare your price with what you can find at newegg and other places. I don't like all the thermaltake line of cases and even this one is a bit showy for me (I am toning down, but don't tell Jack), but I can't pass up all those 5.25" drives down the front. And ahhhh extra room, maybe I won't be bumping my drive cases up against my graphics card anymore.

[Karim]

Oh, I thought this thread was getting ignored, so I didn't post that I found the case I'd go with:

Lian Li PC-V1000 Silver 6+1 HDD ATX/BTX ($199 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16811112051))

[Karim]

As you can see, I also put together my balance between cost and performance:

CPU:
AMD K8 3800+ S939 ($366) [I went the GHz-over-cache route]
MOBO:
ECS KN-1 Extreme, Nforce4 w/ NVRAID/SATA-II x 4, SiS RAID/SATA-I x 2 ($99) [good board, great price]
RAM:
Dual Channel Corsair 1GB x 2 = 2GB DDR400 CL2.5 ($180)
GPU:
GeForce 6600 GT PCIE-X16 128MB DDR3 by Gigabyte ($162) [anything less is so useless it's actually a waste of money, won't be needing too much more]
HDD:
OS/App: 2 x 74GB 10,000RPM WD Raptor SATA = 148GB RAID0 ($364) [yay!!]
Storage: 4 x 320GB 7200RPM 320GB WD Caviar SATA = 640GB RAID10 ($580) [this can never be big enough]
DVDRW:
[Already have one]
PSU:
Ultra X-Connect 500W ($80)
[b]Case:
Lian Li PC-V1000 Silver 6+1 HDD ATX/BTX ($199) [gorgeous wannabe G5 by the G5 case makers; BTX-ready! SIX tool-less hard drives right in front of a 120mm fan in an air duct compartment thingie! Same for PSU! Beautiful!!]
Cooling:
Front: Thermaltake Thunderblade A1927 120mm case fan ($8.99)
Rear: Thermaltake Thunderblade A1927 120mm case fan ($8.99)
CPU: retail fan included
Monitor:
[Already have one]

TOTAL $2048

[SamuraiCatJB]

Oh, I thought this thread was getting ignored, so I didn't post that I found the case I'd go with:

Lian Li PC-V1000 Silver 6+1 HDD ATX/BTX ($199 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16811112051))


Congrats! :) It wasn't being ignored, I was on a business trip to Tucson. :) Earning my new computer.