Subject: Re: small home file/backup server
To: Steve Bellovin <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Jukka Marin <email@example.com>
Date: 08/21/2002 23:46:17
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 03:42:57PM -0400, Steve Bellovin wrote:
> So -- should I use two drives, each on one of the two IDE channels on
> the motherboard?
That would be the fastest way, but I have two disks hanging off the same
IDE channel and it's working pretty well even still.
> The CD drive would be very lightly used, except for
> NetBSD installations and upgrades. Buy an outboard IDE controller?
I have a "RAID" motherboard with four IDE channels, so the CD drive
is on a separate channel (I have four hard disks and a CD-ROM on the
> (SCSI, apart from being unneeded, is well beyond my budget for this
> project.) Would I be better off with a small system disk, plus two
> RAID drives for data?
I installed the system on the RAID and have a small non-RAID partition
for kernel. (I'm not sure if this is still needed.)
> Which RAID should I use? Is RAID1 sufficient, or should I use 4 or 5?
> (The goal is reliability, not speed.)
I'm using RAID1, have suffered a disk failure (thanks, IBM!), but lost no
data. RAID5 needs more disks, AFAIK.
> How much CPU do I need? Would a 233 Mhz Pentium or a 350 Mhz P II
> suffice? (I'll almost certainly use one of the Intel NIC cards.) And
> any suggestions on motherboards?
My box is a 900 MHz Athlon, but the CPU is mostly idling, so I guess
you can use a slower machine without problems. Just get decent drives -
the IBM's I had were fast, the Samsung that replaced the dead IBM is
I'm thinking of getting those new WDC drives (120 GB, 7200 rpm, 8 MB
cache) and building a new RAID1 server. I wonder if those drives are
reliable or not..