[Skullmeat]

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Equipment:
Cisco 2911 Integrated Services Router
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/r...index.html

Cisco Catalyst 2960 (2960-24TT-L)
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/sw...model.html

Dell PowerEdge R710
https://www.dell.com/downloads/global/pr...-sheet.pdf
2x Intel Xeon E5645 - 2.40GHz Hex Core
32 GB (8x 4GB)
2x Dell R Series 250GB 7.2k 2.5" SATA Drive

To Do:
Proper VLAN segmentation for better security
Proper cable management; actual rack
Replace Cisco 2960 with a 3750
Increase server storage (x3 2TB HDD, RAID 5)
Increase server memory to 64GB



What do you guys have at home?

[Pikami]

Got a boner just looking at it.
Nice setup, guessing the power bill is scary tho

[Skullmeat]

Got a boner just looking at it.
Nice setup, guessing the power bill is scary tho

Compared to AC/Heating? Not really. Certainly more thirsty than your average laptop and TV, but the bulk of your power use is things like AC and refrigerator.

[natifix]

Yea that's really cool! Id like to learn to get something going too, a closet build or something to learn from, I call em labrats. I still have a ways to go before that though. You gonna find yourself a small rack or something for all that?

I have a spare bookshelf was considering making into a rack type thingy...

This is why I need to keep an eye out of CL too, so I can pick up stuff on the cheap locally,

[mothered]

Got a boner just looking at it.

This comment has made my day.

In terms of your RAID 5, do you find that due to the parity overhead, Intensive write operations Is somewhat slower? I'd say there wouldn't be a noticeable difference.

[Skullmeat]

Got a boner just looking at it.

This comment has made my day.

In terms of your RAID 5, do you find that due to the parity overhead, Intensive write operations Is somewhat slower? I'd say there wouldn't be a noticeable difference.

Currently I'm not using RAID 5, the server doesn't have enough disks to do so. The reason I want raid 5 is because it offers better performance than mirroring and has fault tolerance. Unfortunately, the WD Red drives I want to use are a bit pricey.

[mothered]

Got a boner just looking at it.

This comment has made my day.

In terms of your RAID 5, do you find that due to the parity overhead, Intensive write operations Is somewhat slower? I'd say there wouldn't be a noticeable difference.

Currently I'm not using RAID 5, the server doesn't have enough disks to do so. The reason I want raid 5 is because it offers better performance than mirroring and has fault tolerance. Unfortunately, the WD Red drives I want to use are a bit pricey.

Yes, a minimum of 3 disks Is required for RAID 5.

RAID 1 only requires 2 disks and also has fault tolerance. Correct me If I'm wrong, but I believe It has better read performance.

[Skullmeat]

This comment has made my day.

In terms of your RAID 5, do you find that due to the parity overhead, Intensive write operations Is somewhat slower? I'd say there wouldn't be a noticeable difference.

Currently I'm not using RAID 5, the server doesn't have enough disks to do so. The reason I want raid 5 is because it offers better performance than mirroring and has fault tolerance. Unfortunately, the WD Red drives I want to use are a bit pricey.

Yes, a minimum of 3 disks Is required for RAID 5.

RAID 1 only requires 2 disks and also has fault tolerance. Correct me If I'm wrong, but I believe It has better read performance.

RAID 1 is mirroring, that sacrifices storage space.

[mothered]

Currently I'm not using RAID 5, the server doesn't have enough disks to do so. The reason I want raid 5 is because it offers better performance than mirroring and has fault tolerance. Unfortunately, the WD Red drives I want to use are a bit pricey.

Yes, a minimum of 3 disks Is required for RAID 5.

RAID 1 only requires 2 disks and also has fault tolerance. Correct me If I'm wrong, but I believe It has better read performance.

RAID 1 is mirroring, that sacrifices storage space.

Definitely so- due to mirroring, It obviously requires twice as many drives.

Would you rate RAID 1 or RAID 5 better In read/write performance?

[Skullmeat]

Yes, a minimum of 3 disks Is required for RAID 5.

RAID 1 only requires 2 disks and also has fault tolerance. Correct me If I'm wrong, but I believe It has better read performance.

RAID 1 is mirroring, that sacrifices storage space.

Definitely so- due to mirroring, It obviously requires twice as many drives.

Would you rate RAID 1 or RAID 5 better In read/write performance?

Can't say, since I haven't used anything other than RAID 0. To answer your question, from what I'm reading, RAID 5 has overtaken RAID 1 in performance, mainly due to more modern RAID controllers, and RAID 5's more widespread use these days.