XigmaNAS

Hi All,

First of all, I'd like to introduce myself since I'm new in this forum.
My name is Patricio, I'm from Argentina and I work as an IT consultant on Binnaris IT consulting.
I've been using NAS4Free since version 0.7.2 Sabanda (revision 6694), in fact that's server I've installed on 2011 and never had a single issue.
Clearly NAS4Free is one of the best NAS systems ever.

A few days ago, a client asked if there is possible to install NAS4Free on a IBM System x3850 standard
(as far as I know, this is a base server and the disks are yet to be bough and installed)
Here are the specs of this machine:

http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/x/hardwar ... specs.html

http://www-304.ibm.com/shop/america...1 ... logId=-840

I've googled if there was any info about this specific kind of installation, but I've found nothing.

My primary concern about this is:

Will the disk controllers allow to connect the disks WITHOUT using the RAID function?

Since the best characteristic of FreeNAS is to be able to use ZFS (on RAIDZ, RAIDZ2 or RAIDZ3), what sense would it make to be forced to use the disks on a hardware RAID configuration?

If Im not wrong, the best of using a ZFS RAID is to be able to replace a broken disk with no
trouble other than change it for a new one and perform a zpool resilver.

Given the case of this server's disk controller will not permit a "JBOD" configuration, it's a good call to install and configure FreeNAS to use the RAIDX, provided by the controller?

Thank you in advance for all the info and advice you could provide about this!

FIRST 3 PEOPLE WHO ANSWERS WINS A FREE & UNLIMITED BEER IN ARGENTINA!

Patricio

Hello Patricio,

for compatibility of the system have a look in the Hardware compatibility Lists of FreeBSD 9.2.
After first Reading I would expect N4F in its latest version should work on this machine.

Is it proved there is no JBOD Configuration possible ?

My first thoughts on the Idea in Mixing up a Hardware Raid with ZFS is for me a somewhat odd idea.
Because you have a HardwareRaid and you loose some disks for parity and then you overlay it with an other parity loss for ZFS. Also you loose the independece of the RaidController if something with the machine goes wrong.
Maybe others with more experience with this servergrade hardware may give a better guidance on this idea.

How about using the machine with an extra Controller Card (e.g from LSI 9211-8i/9240-8i, Dell Perc H310, IBM 1015M) for JBOD configuration?
There are some hints on this topic in the Hardware controller subforum.

Kind Regards
apollo

unfortunatly the spec are not specific enough.

it does not say which chipset the motherboard has.
which network cards are int he ssytem.
which raid controller is on the board.

very hard to find info about this IBM:
Broadcom 1GB NIC is supported: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?quer ... ormat=html

Disk controller M1015 supported if flashed in IT mode: viewtopic.php?f=59&t=4111

with that i would say that is a good machine for nas4free

raulfg3 wrote:
Disk controller M1015 supported if flashed in IT mode: viewtopic.php?f=59&t=4111

This translate in my opinion to : "JBOD should be possible".
I agree to bossmanns view, this should be a nice piece of hardware for Nas4Free.....

Firsto of all,

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU! For all the replays and info in them.

Yes, effectively I didn't provided more info because didn't have a technical meeting with our potential client.
As soon as get more info I'll let you know.
What I do know is that our potential client already has this server. I guess that's a "leftover" of their virtualized environment hardware.

About the hardware being on the Hardware compatibility Lists of FreeBSD 9, yes, go look there was the first thing I did; but as b0ssman correctly say
this kind of servers (the vendor really) doesn't specify the -in a word- "chipsets" the use, so it's hard to search and do a item-by-item driver compatibility checklist.

About the controller, yes, of course, doesn't make any sense to do a RAIDZ# on top a hardware RAID, I definetly would not recommendo nor do it for a production environment.
Also, as apollo567 say, I've read something about reflashing the controller's firmware in order to enable it to use a JBOD configuration.
The drawback of this could arise if the reflash goes wrong (I think the client shoud be -convinced first- / absolutely aware and agree to do this)

The other issue of weight, I think it's the 20TB total amount of space (payload data) the client needs, this maybe quite difficult to achive because the
biggest disk IBM provides for this server is 1.2TB so, just for payload (not parity nor hot-spare disks) there´s gonig to need more than 16 disks (and they're really expensive ones I guess)

About CPU, RAM and NICs, I think there's no problem.

What do you think about (if possible) using this server as is to build a "testing" environment, see how it performs, and, with this info, decide if adding more disks and controllers worth it or the best should be buy a
new server with better configuration for a NAS?

Well, thank you again for all the info, and I'm looking forward to hear your comments about this.

Cheers
Patricio

GavilanZ wrote:
The other issue of weight, I think it's the 20TB total amount of space (payload data) the client needs, this maybe quite difficult to achive because the
biggest disk IBM provides for this server is 1.2TB so, just for payload (not parity nor hot-spare disks) there´s gonig to need more than 16 disks (and they're really expensive ones I guess)

Well I think/hope third party enterprise disks should work here also. (IBM ist not a harddisk manufacturer anymore). They are available for up to 6Gb each (economic senseful up to 4 TB), so an array with 20 TB shouldn't be a problem. But you must check, if the harddisk Controller supports disks bigger than 2TB (else an additional Diskcontroller which supports them would make sense)

GavilanZ wrote: What do you think about (if possible) using this server as is to build a "testing" environment, see how it performs, and, with this info, decide if adding more disks and controllers worth it or the best should be buy a
new server with better configuration for a NAS?

This sounds like a very good strategy, there is a German saying "Versuch macht klug" (Kind of 'you only know if you try' )
I would definitely spend some hours trying this before spending lots of money for new hardware. I would also try an additional Hardware Controller as add-on before buying into complete set of new hardware.
As long as the server only works as NAS, I don't think more hardware needed. In fact the newest hardware might possibly lack FreeBSD 9.2 support.

Hi apollo567,

Thank you for all the advice, it's really appreciated!

Yes, completely agree, but -as you sure know- many times the "IT area" has some sort of "contract" or agreement with hardware vendors (they need the support / scapegoat when things go bad ).
I'ts not likely that they agree to use 3rd party HW on their servers (doing that would most likely revoke the warranty / support contract or agreement).

Totally; the first thing should be verify how big are the disks that the controller(s) can support. I would guess that here:
http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/t ... l#disk_int or here:
http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/tips0740.html is the answer to that question, but preferably I'd like someone from IBM who assures this.

"Versuch macht klug"....Jawohl!...I can't agree with you more!

I think using this machine to do a testing environment would be the smartest choice...I'ts the first thing I'll propose.

I'll be sure to let you know any news or info we can gather in the future meeting with this potential client.

Ich danke Ihnen sehr für die Informationen!
eine Umarmung

Patricio

apollo567 wrote:

GavilanZ wrote:
The other issue of weight, I think it's the 20TB total amount of space (payload data) the client needs, this maybe quite difficult to achive because the
biggest disk IBM provides for this server is 1.2TB so, just for payload (not parity nor hot-spare disks) there´s gonig to need more than 16 disks (and they're really expensive ones I guess)

Well I think/hope third party enterprise disks should work here also. (IBM ist not a harddisk manufacturer anymore). They are available for up to 6Gb each (economic senseful up to 4 TB), so an array with 20 TB shouldn't be a problem. But you must check, if the harddisk Controller supports disks bigger than 2TB (else an additional Diskcontroller which supports them would make sense)

the problem here is that the ibm x3850 only supports 8 2.5 discs or 16 1.8 disc.
you do not want to build a storage system in that configuration, maybe for testing.

in that scenario you would get an external jbod and a sas controller to attache is so that you could use 3.5 discs.
for ibm
http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/storage/d ... index.html
supermicro
http://www.supermicro.com.tw/products/c ... 28JBOD.cfm
or build yourself
http://www.servethehome.com/external-sa ... ng-part-1/

b0ssman wrote: the problem here is that the ibm x3850 only supports 8 2.5 discs or 16 1.8 disc.

Guter Punkt b0ssmann, das hatte ich nicht gesehen......