Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
Building a home server. Please help, DC!
40hz:
I don't understand how this is different than the configuration I posted on the previous page. I don't mean technically, I mean conceptually. Isn't this a rack/server type setup just like the one I posted from Stallard?
-superboyac (September 03, 2011, 01:05 AM)
--- End quote ---
It's not. I think SJ was arguing for going with a standard server as opposed to a NAS device and worked up this configuration as an example of what could be gotten for similar money. (Hope so anyway - because that's why I was agreeing with him. ;D )
re: high-speed backbone
I think what's being said here is that a NAS is usually strictly a storage device. You can't log onto it and do things to the files stored there. So any file manipulation operations (i.e. conversions, ripping, directory management, etc.) need to be done on a PC and pushed/pulled over the network as opposed to being done directly on the server. Same with directory management and moving files. So with huge files, the speed of the network can become a bottleneck. And since a standard Windows server is also a workstation, you could further avoid network overhead by running things like a DVD rip directly on the server.
:)
superboyac:
I don't understand how this is different than the configuration I posted on the previous page. I don't mean technically, I mean conceptually. Isn't this a rack/server type setup just like the one I posted from Stallard?
-superboyac (September 03, 2011, 01:05 AM)
--- End quote ---
It's not. I think SJ was arguing for going with a standard server as opposed to a NAS device and worked up this configuration as an example of what could be gotten for similar money. (Hope so anyway - because that's why I was agreeing with him. ;D )
re: high-speed backbone
I think what's being said here is that a NAS is usually strictly a storage device. You can't log onto it and do things to the files stored there. So any file manipulation operations (i.e. conversions, ripping, directory management, etc.) need to be done on a PC and pushed/pulled over the network as opposed to being done directly on the server. Same with directory management and moving files. So with huge files, the speed of the network can become a bottleneck. And since a standard Windows server is also a workstation, you could further avoid network overhead by running things like a DVD rip directly on the server.
:)
-40hz (September 03, 2011, 02:49 AM)
--- End quote ---
Oh wow! This is very enlightening to me. I most definitely DO want to do a bunch of work on the server drives themselves. I absolutely don't want to do the work on my desktop and push/pull it from the storage. No way. I have some big plans for this server. I want to create some really nice interactive stuff for myself on it. I'm getting a server, that's it. No NAS. Thanks 40, always a big help.
superboyac, if you are able to configure NIC teaming (with your switch) or proper load-balancing it should work out fine.
If the plan is to rely on single Gig link to the backbone switch please be very patient during file operations. :o
-lotusrootstarch (September 03, 2011, 01:19 AM)
--- End quote ---
I'm not trying to be funny, but I have no idea what in the world you are talking about. I don't know what you think I know, but it sounds to me like I don't know jack about this stuff. Let me break down my thoughts on your two sentances there:
This is the very first time I've heard of NIC teaming.
What switch?
I don't know what load I'm balancing. I wouldn't know what the "proper" way to do it is, nor would I know what the improper way of doing it would be.
I don't know what Gig link is. I still don't know what a backbone switch is. I definitely am lost on what I'm being patient about when the single gig link is doing whatever to the backbone switch while I'm trying to do file operations. You could have said the following and it would have made just as much sense to me:
superboyac, if you are able to configure TRB tomfoolery (with your blanket) or proper angularizing it should work out fine.
If the plan is to rely on single Lop link to the hardnose pulley please be very patient during file operations. ohmy
--- End quote ---
lotusrootstarch:
LOL, that's ok. I remember the times I was happier being clueless. Whatever works for you, good luck. ;)
skwire:
superboyac, in regards to a backbone switch, what they're referring to is the ethernet switch you're going to be using in this setup of yours. In other words, you have your desktop and this forthcoming server. You're going to have to network them together using an ethernet switch of some sort. Knowing your preferences, this will certainly have to be a gigabit speed switch. The load-balancing and NIC teaming that's being spoken of is more commonly called aggregated ethernet. This means that your server has two or more gigabit network cards that, along with the switch, can be configured to act as one multi-gigabit capable network interface. Obviously, the switch itself must have this capability, too (and not nearly all switches do). Does this help clear things up?
steeladept:
Nice quote SB, but you really will want to look into that kind of stuff before you start really looking at a server. Really, from what I have read in these 6 pages, SJ and 40 are trying to lead you back to where you should really be looking and that is a heavy-duty workstation class machine (and really even that is way overkill). Looking at a good i7 based workstation with commercial grade SATA hard drives (maybe even Solid State hard drives if speed is critical) should work faster and better for what you are looking for. Then, if the space isn't there, you can look at a NAS for storing completed projects (say fully ripped, indexed, and re-encoded video for example) to make it available to the machine again if/when needed with the side benefit that other machines on the network can access it too. A side benefit of that route is you have much more flexibility in case choices and design considerations for it's location (instead of dealing with the jet engine running next to the TV you are watching the movie on, if that were appropriate - e.g. you don't have the whole house wired CAT6).
I just got my first server with the express purpose of configuring it and giving to our church. It is a really nice HP DL380 G3 that I got for free, so I can't complain. I really have no need for it personally though, and the fans running in the same room as my computer equipment makes the room noisy and even hotter - in other words even less desirable to be there in the first place. I like overkill just as much as anyone, but really, servers are really good at one thing and that is what they do. If you have big plans to do lots of things - that is what desktops/workstations are really good at. You may just want to rethink how you are attacking the problem you are trying to solve.
In fact - do this. You already have a really beefy machine, right? Use VMware and build your servers as virtual servers. Build bunches of them if you want, they are only software, so you can create and destroy VM's as often as needed. Create specialized ones and general purpose ones. Create machines that work with alternative solutions. Once you have everything working the way you want using test files and test data (you can add data storage later to do the same thing over and over again) sit back and see how it was done. Determine the relative performance of each option. Did it require certain server software? Did it require multiple machines that specialized in specific tasks? Was it flaky and temperamental? If the answers here are generally yes, then a server may well be the way to go. But if you want simple elegance and set and forget features, you will likely find better, more refined answers on a workstation where everything runs in one box with a single client OS (or a consumer grade Home Server if you prefer). Regardless of which answer you come up with though, the beauty of setting it all up in a hypervisor is you can then roll it up and drop the entire system pre-set onto the new box and be running in minutes using something like ESXi on the new box instead of windows.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version