Need a home server

I want to build a home server. I know the hardware requirements are pretty light so I am not to concerned there but will want to use relatively modern, power efficient, hardware. But my main question is on software. I had started this train of thought a while back and had been recommended freenas. Here is the wish list:

Number one and most important is be simple to set-up. My free time has gotten very scarce and the coming year it going to be even worse so I don't have a lot of time to learn a new OS.

What I want. Your typical file back-up. Mainly TV seasons and the other media. I definitely want fault tolerant as there is simply to much data to back-up any other way economically. I want to be able to stream to my 360. Being able to stream over the net to my smartphone like a sling box would be very nice. I would also like to be able to run torrents on it as well.

HD management. Is there any way to mix and match HD sizes? For instance say I use 1TB drives now and they get filled up. Any way to add to that without completely rebuilding a new array?

I am still researching freenas, unraid, and Windows Home Server and am open to any other suggestions. Windows server certainly seems to have its list of problems but would be more familiar than learning a linux environment.

I am just sort of lost and looking for some direction. Thanks guys.

www.openfiler.com

logical volume management will allow you to mix and match harddrives and add more space later on down the road

I like windows home server, one of the main complaints is the lack of redundancy for storage, but no matter what level of RAID you're running, you still have to responsible enough to backup, so I figure the same lesson applies here.

Plus the remote access piece of WHS is pretty sweet, too.

openfiller looks interesting but a little to rough around the edges for me. For someone with a bit more networking and linux/unix knowledge but more than I want to get into.

it doesnt require much in the way of linux knowledge...it offers a lot and you can really dig into it or you can have a fairly simple setup with it...

FreeNAS might be a better option for you as it is much easier to configure and manage than openfiler

Windows Server 2003
SATA RAID5

done.

ccb056 said:

Windows Server 2003
SATA RAID5

done.

Click to expand...

I have thought about WS2003 as well. The more I think about it the more I think Home Server makes sense. Everything else is MS: Vista on me and my wifes laptop, my phone, my 360, just makes seems like a natural fit.

You'll regret it, server 2003 can do everything home server can do plus more.

ccb056 said:

You'll regret it, server 2003 can do everything home server can do plus more.

Click to expand...

Don't think you've used WHS then.

Having used both, for what you're describing, WHS is the better option.

cw823 said:

Don't think you've used WHS then.

Having used both, for what you're describing, WHS is the better option.

Click to expand...

WHS has certainly gotten a very bad reputation that the definitely earned, but it seems to be a much better product after the update. Seems to be very similar to the Vista hate but is hard for people to get over their prior thoughts. Hopefully Microsoft is getting the message.

For hardware I was thinking an underclocked/undervolted E1200 with a ICH10R based G43/G45. I have a PSU and 2x512MB DDR667 to add to it. I am putting this into an NZXT Rogue I have been unable to get rid of. Using a 500GB I already have for the OS and getting three WD 1TB GP in RAID 5 for the storage.

ou_phidelt said:

WHS has certainly gotten a very bad reputation that the definitely earned, but it seems to be a much better product after the update. Seems to be very similar to the Vista hate but is hard for people to get over their prior thoughts. Hopefully Microsoft is getting the message.

Click to expand...

The message is that beta testing should be done by beta testers and not the public at large, and we should not have to habitually wait for a Service Pack for Microsoft to get it right, when it should have been right in the first place.

For hardware I was thinking an underclocked/undervolted E1200 with a ICH10R based G43/G45. I have a PSU and 2x512MB DDR667 to add to it. I am putting this into an NZXT Rogue I have been unable to get rid of. Using a 500GB I already have for the OS and getting three WD 1TB GP in RAID 5 for the storage.

Click to expand...

Sounds good to me although I would *always* want more memory.

Captain Newbie said:

The message is that beta testing should be done by beta testers and not the public at large, and we should not have to habitually wait for a Service Pack for Microsoft to get it right, when it should have been right in the first place.


Sounds good to me although I would *always* want more memory.

Click to expand...

I agree, hence while I usually wait until after the first service pack before jumping one board. Vista was the first one I hit out of the gate.

I have no problems getting more memory. 2x1GB can be had easily for $30, but is there a point? I just didn't think there would be much if any performance difference.

ou_phidelt said:

I agree, hence while I usually wait until after the first service pack before jumping one board. Vista was the first one I hit out of the gate.

I have no problems getting more memory. 2x1GB can be had easily for $30, but is there a point? I just didn't think there would be much if any performance difference.

Click to expand...

I don't know, I don't have a home server. My reasoning is "It's cheap, why not?" rather than any concrete reasons.

whatever you choose, i personally believe in virtual servers.
i had a power cut earlier today, and my virtual 2003 machine bsod on bootup. the 3rd boot and it loaded so i might scan it tonight, but if it ever failed to load up, then i have 2 backups from previous times...

you have so much flexibility on a virtual machine i could go on for ever.

WHS will work pretty much fresh from install with your whole network setup as described. you will need to setup your xbox 360 as a extender, but should be fairly easy.

also, if you have the space on the server, it can backup and manage your WHOLE network. every comp on it.

some other nice things about WHS that does not come with 2k3 or needs alot of configuring is a free domain name, and easy remote desktop in to any PCs on your network. just go to the website for your server, and log in. from there you just click what comp you want to conenct to. its alot easier than setting up a VPN access.

1 problem with WHS is there is no 64 bit flavor. so limited by the 3.xx gigs of memory. if your willing to hold out for a bit, WHS2 which will be based off server 2k8 will be out mid 09. supposedly this will also be a 64 bit flavor. the current WHS is based off of Vista Ultimate without all the crap.

also, Tivo software does not work with WHS. there are add-on but these are basicly free-as-is type. but there are some good ones that improve on the disc managaement.

ppe1700 said:

whatever you choose, i personally believe in virtual servers.
i had a power cut earlier today, and my virtual 2003 machine bsod on bootup. the 3rd boot and it loaded so i might scan it tonight, but if it ever failed to load up, then i have 2 backups from previous times...

you have so much flexibility on a virtual machine i could go on for ever.

Click to expand...

My WHS runs in vmware.

I have rethought the hardware and am now thinking this case which severely limited my motherboard options. I ended up with this Intel board. Now if somone can find where to buy http://techreport.com/discussions.x/12468 motherboard you have my upmost gratitude.

I will say I am happy to see better thoughts and experiences here, Most places its brought up is a bashing fest.

I use unRAID. After going with Windows 2003 and RAID for a few years and trying out WHS, I found unRAID to fit perfectly.

I don't know Linux very well and you don't need to. It just runs. It sits headless in my basement and about the only time I need to mess with it is to add/upgrade a drive or upgrade the OS (not often if you don't want to beta test).

cw823 said:

My WHS runs in vmware.

Click to expand...

i have my apache and Cacti appliance running in vmware <3 it!

cw823 said:

My WHS runs in vmware.

Click to expand...

lol
i have a debian box running on a dfi lanparty ultrad, opty 165, 2gb ocz pc4000, and 4 10k rpm 36gb scsi drives... thats my vm machine
i run a web server, backuppc server, and a couple of testing servers on it

i believe VM is totally the way to go