Network Storage Advice Needed

[Alpinemaps]

I'm considering incorporating a network storage solution into my home computing network, and I'm looking for some advice/recommendations.

Here's really what I'm looking for:

* At least 500GB of space
* Ability to RAID (2 500GB drives would be fine)
* Ability to expand (so it can be a device that has two bays open)
* Plug into my router
* Easy to do backups

Nice to have, but not necessary:
* Ability to log in over the Internet
* Expansion capability (firewire, etc)

I've seen a few things out there, but I'm not sure exactly what people are using and really like. I'm not too worried about noise - it will be sitting in my office, and that's the room I use the least in my house. I'd really like to have something that my two desktops and my laptop can connect to, that has a smaller energy footprint than my 7 year old desktop, and something that's dedicated as a file server, rather than just some space on one of my desktops.

Any suggestions?

 

[Chaos Descending]

Sorry, I can't add anything to this other than to say I am also eager to hear some suggestions as I have similar needs!

 

[Shaw]

Well, you are talking about a normal server set up with that list. And there are a large number of options for such systems.

On the other hand, if you are willing to dial back some of that a little for a home solution, you could do what I just did for one of my clients... which was use Apple's Airport Extreme basestation.

When first released a few years ago I was amazed to find that Apple had included a number of features (such as individual accounts, USB hard drive and USB printer sharing) that made it a nice home server solution (for both wireless and wired networks). While it doesn't have Firewire, for many home needs the USB 2.0 port is fast enough.

And for Mac users running Leopard, one of the recent software updates enabled the use of Time Machine with Airport Extreme (though I don't believe it is officially supported in that configuration). Otherwise, for older Macs and PCs, it's filesharing ability is pretty much how you would expect it to be with any server.

A friend of mine set up a similar configuration so that he could access it from anywhere on the internet. Then again, he also has a static IP and does hosting from his home. But I know it can be done.

If most of what you have on that list are firm requirements though, I would think about a small headless server system (I'd use Linux if starting from scratch) to have all that. But yeah, for a home server solution that has a small foot print, it sure has quite a few bases covered.

Best of luck with your hunt. Tell us what you figure out in the end.

 

[Alpinemaps]

I'm guessing Apple is out of the picture, since I'm only using PCs at home. I should have mentioned the print server - that is a nice addition to have, too.

Definitely interested in any other suggestions anyone might have.

 

[scotthm]

Any suggestions?

You might want to look at the offerings of Buffalo Technology: http://www.buffalotech.com/products/network-storage/

I haven't used any of their RAID offerings, but I have a couple of single disk LinkStations at the house, and they seem to be working OK.

The LinkStations don't support RAID, but they do have two USB ports on the back so you can add external HDDs to them.

---------------

 

[Shaw]

I'm guessing Apple is out of the picture, since I'm only using PCs at home. I should have mentioned the print server - that is a nice addition to have, too.

That was a cross platform solution... the house hold I set it up in uses both Macs and Windows systems. If it wasn't cross platform, I wouldn't have suggested it.

 

[TEH BABA]

Linux is good for networking.

 

[Brolan]

I've looked into this myself for my home network and never settled on a good solution. The best one for my needs was using an old computer with large hard drives, but I didn't want power consumption this setup would use.

The standalone devices like the ones below all have various drawbacks.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822155003

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822186050

 

[ATimson]

I've looked into this myself for my home network and never settled on a good solution. The best one for my needs was using an old computer with large hard drives, but I didn't want power consumption this setup would use.

I don't mind the power consumption for such a setup, especially because the machine isn't going to be a dedicated server. I'll be getting a MacBook when the next revision comes out for my day-to-day use, and turn my old tower into a file server; I'll still need to keep the old machine around for gaming uses, though.

As a file server, it's mainly going to be a home for my music and movies, I think. I might end up remote desktop-ing in instead of installing Boot Camp on the MacBook; we'll see just how much Windows stuff besides games I really need. (This would also let me keep one iTunes library accessed over the network from other machines. I think. Can you access video over the network?)

Any suggestions for what software setup to use, though? Am I going to be best off with just a normal WinXP share, or will I gain any benefits from moving to some sort of Linux-based solution? (I'm not planning on running RAID, as the machine currently has three very missmatched hard drives and no place to mount a fourth.) I'm aware that this would lose my remote desktop ability for Windows programs, but there's always Boot Camp or WINE.

 

[Brolan]

I was going to just open up the drives in XP for sharing and let everyone on the network have access. You can stream video just like anything else.

I'm not enough of a Linux expert to tell you the best thing out there. If you are looking to record and show TV shows my friend swears by MythTV. You can record video with TV cards on one (server) computer and watch it from any computer on the network. And the best thing is it's free.

After posting my last message I found the device below. It doesn't do RAID but it seems pretty slick.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822107006

 

[Alaedhros]

I'm considering incorporating a network storage solution into my home computing network, and I'm looking for some advice/recommendations.

Here's really what I'm looking for:

* At least 500GB of space
* Ability to RAID (2 500GB drives would be fine)
* Ability to expand (so it can be a device that has two bays open)
* Plug into my router
* Easy to do backups

Nice to have, but not necessary:
* Ability to log in over the Internet
* Expansion capability (firewire, etc)

It sounds like you described either a NAS or an older desktop. There are plenty of NAS options out there (the Buffalo TeraStations being amongst the more well-known consumer models), but the downside of a NAS is the price--four hard drive bays will cost you. An older desktop (and you have one) is perfect, as the only cost are whatever additional hard drives you want, and those aren't too expensive these days. You said that the energy footprint of the desktop would be a concern, but why not just send it to standby or hibernation after X minutes of inactivity? (Brolan, this applies to you, too!)

On the other hand, if you are willing to dial back some of that a little for a home solution, you could do what I just did for one of my clients... which was use Apple's Airport Extreme basestation.

I'm not sure that's a cheaper solution. The basestation + an external hdd is approaching the price of a NAS (if not more), and it doesn't do RAID (unless the external hdd does RAID, and those are expensive) nor is it expandable.

Any suggestions for what software setup to use, though? Am I going to be best off with just a normal WinXP share, or will I gain any benefits from moving to some sort of Linux-based solution? (I'm not planning on running RAID, as the machine currently has three very missmatched hard drives and no place to mount a fourth.)

I don't think there's any benefit to switching to Linux; that's a lot to learn, unless you already know/use Linux. If you already know Linux, I'd say you might as well switch so that you don't have to run the whole Windows OS + graphics, just the bits that you need for file sharing. The only other benefit I can think of is that using Linux would make it very easy to combine those three hard drives into one volume using LVM, so you'd just see one big driver rather than three. Oh, and if you do go with Linux, most any major distro would allow you to do a server install, so distro/setup choice is not a significant issue, I think.

 

[ATimson]

You said that the energy footprint of the desktop would be a concern, but why not just send it to standby or hibernation after X minutes of inactivity? (Brolan, this applies to you, too!)

That'll work, as long as you can physically wire the system into your router/switch. If you're planning on connecting the storage device via wireless, though, wake-on-LAN isn't an option.

I don't think there's any benefit to switching to Linux; that's a lot to learn, unless you already know/use Linux.

Know, yes; use, occasionally. I had a Linux partition for a while, and dual-booted, but the marginal World of Warcraft framerate gain just wasn't worth the pain of keeping the 3D drivers working with each kernel upgrade and I switched to using a VM for my schoolwork.

The only other benefit I can think of is that using Linux would make it very easy to combine those three hard drives into one volume using LVM, so you'd just see one big driver rather than three.

XP actually lets you do something similar; the only thing keeping me from doing that is that if one hard drive goes bad, you lose access to everything on all three. Is that the case with Linux's LVM?

Alternately, I could just mount the other two drives as directories on the first (I forget if all three just have to be NTFS, or just the one w/the directories--but that was my planned format anyways). Not quite as convenient, but easier disaster recovery.

 

[Brolan]

...

You said that the energy footprint of the desktop would be a concern, but why not just send it to standby or hibernation after X minutes of inactivity? (Brolan, this applies to you, too!)

I never thought of that, that's a great idea. I'll give it a try.

 

[Alaedhros]

You said that the energy footprint of the desktop would be a concern, but why not just send it to standby or hibernation after X minutes of inactivity? (Brolan, this applies to you, too!)

That'll work, as long as you can physically wire the system into your router/switch. If you're planning on connecting the storage device via wireless, though, wake-on-LAN isn't an option.

Quite right. Sorry, I didn't think of a wireless connection; my brain just assumed that a server would be wired in. Sorry!

The only other benefit I can think of is that using Linux would make it very easy to combine those three hard drives into one volume using LVM, so you'd just see one big driver rather than three.

XP actually lets you do something similar; the only thing keeping me from doing that is that if one hard drive goes bad, you lose access to everything on all three. Is that the case with Linux's LVM?

Hmm. I would assume the same would happen with Linux's LVM, but that's just a guess. It seems quite likely, though. Yeah, if your drives are older then the better solution might be to mount them as directories, as you said.

...
You said that the energy footprint of the desktop would be a concern, but why not just send it to standby or hibernation after X minutes of inactivity? (Brolan, this applies to you, too!)

I never thought of that, that's a great idea. I'll give it a try.

I hope it works out! I'm not sure if you're aware of this, so I'll toss it out there: there should be a wake-on-LAN setting in your BIOS somewhere, so any incoming network activity will wake it up from sleep.

 

[Alpinemaps]

The Wake-On-LAN also requires your NIC to have that capability. My NIC doesn't, so that solution won't work, unless I replace the NIC.

For me, it's coming down to price - the cost to upgrade my system just a little bit to get the NIC with Wake-On-LAN, and/or a newer motherboard with RAID capability, two bigger hard drives.

I'm still researching, but I'm hearing good things about the Buffalo 1 TB product. I will try to find a link.

 

[ATimson]

The Wake-On-LAN also requires your NIC to have that capability. My NIC doesn't, so that solution won't work, unless I replace the NIC.

True. My five-year-old machine has it, at least on the network card built into the motherboard (never bothered to check the gigabit card); I would have expected most machines of that vintage and newer to be similarly equipped. (And if it's even a little bit older, I'd wonder if the hard drive controller would be up to snuff, as it's probably only ATA/33 or ATA/66.)

 

[Alpinemaps]

Looks like I'm going to spring for this: Buffalo LinkStation Pro Duo

It has two drives, so I can RAID. USB on back for easy backup (or expansion). Print server capability, and you can put it on the web if you'd like. I just read through the user manual, and it's pretty configurable, and you can set it up securely, too.

The only question I have is whether it would be easy to swap the drives out for bigger drives. However, you can daisy chain them, so I can always pick up another if I need to.