bit-tech.net

iSCSI Storage: What it is, and why you should be using it

Comments 1 to 25 of 35

Reply
Phalanx 25th May 2010, 10:51 Quote
Interesting idea. I run a server at the moment for keeping files stored, but I'm considering something different to allow me to use the server as a folding rig.

How much would a setup like this cost for an average one?
phuzz 25th May 2010, 11:16 Quote
FreeNAS has iSCSI built in, and the new version (OpenMediaVault) will have it as well. So to answer your question Ph4lanx, free, that's how much :)
mi1ez 25th May 2010, 11:28 Quote
That first picture on page one would have me worried about my NAS!
wuyanxu 25th May 2010, 11:31 Quote
very nice tutorial.

what about other OS? if they don't have iSCSI, would it be possible to do the mapped network drive as usual?
Xir 25th May 2010, 11:31 Quote
...isn't that about the same as what NDAS does?
(only without extra drivers)
phuzz 25th May 2010, 11:41 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuyanxu
what about other OS?
OSX has had it since 10.4, M$ since win2000 and linux since 2005.
Basically if your OS doesn't support iSCSI then you're still using an Amiga.
capnPedro 25th May 2010, 11:46 Quote
I'm still not seeing the benefit over regular network drives... and look, I can actually get the amount of free space reported correctly!

http://forums.bit-tech.net/picture.php?albumid=401&pictureid=10701
Da_Rude_Baboon 25th May 2010, 11:58 Quote
Have you seen the price of that Qnap though? £450!
Bindibadgi 25th May 2010, 12:10 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mi1ez
That first picture on page one would have me worried about my NAS!

That's just Windows Home Server being awesome.

Yayyyy.

Microsoft in "We can't make two Windows products talk to each other properly" shocker. It's reading the first drive in a 5-disk box that's 500GB in size.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Da_Rude_Baboon
Have you seen the price of that Qnap though? £450!

I know! It's a business box but the software is really very very nice. Still, I was just using it as an example for the guide :) I'll do an iSCSI one maybe for FreeNAS when I do our "build our own NAS" article, but I still need to blag some hard drives for a month to actually do it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phuzz
OSX has had it since 10.4, M$ since win2000 and linux since 2005.
Basically if your OS doesn't support iSCSI then you're still using an Amiga.

Actually you had to download a PowerPack for XP to have iSCSI
Guinevere 25th May 2010, 12:13 Quote
+1 for Freenas, has pretty much any network service you want. Including iSCSI
Hugo 25th May 2010, 13:17 Quote
CAT5eeeeeeee cable, you say?
GW42 25th May 2010, 13:46 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi
I'll do an iSCSI one maybe for FreeNAS when I do our "build our own NAS" article, but I still need to blag some hard drives for a month to actually do it.

Looking forward to that. Off the shelf NAS boxes always seem hideously overpriced to me.

There are lots of options out there for homebuilds - freenas, UnRaid (heard about but not looked into closely), full blown linux server, even just setting up shared&mapped drives on a windows box. Would be good to see a detailed pros and cons list of the various OS options, and how they stack up against the software from the likes of Drobo, Thecus, Qnap etc...

Hardware has always seemed the easy bit by comparison. I guess the only concern I have is the presumably lower power benefits of a purpose built box, but having seen power figures for a few purpose built NAS's, I'm not convinced that they're all that much better than a system built with an eye on power. Obviously a NAS is likely to be on 24/7, so things like do the disks spin down properly etc... becomes a bigger issue. I'm always surprised how few NAS reviews look at those sorts of things, though I appreciate the cost of the NAS box itself (especially an off the shelf one!) is likely to be by far the bigger cost for many years.
moullas 25th May 2010, 13:51 Quote
iSCSI <> NAS

Nas is getting a lot of pc's on a networked storage, iSCSI for attaching one pc to it (or more if having multiple LUN's), but without sharing the same volume. Unless clustering.
ch424 25th May 2010, 15:47 Quote
Quote:
We briefly tested the teaming feature with a motherboard we had in the lab, but found it didn't improve our performance - we suspect our mobo's Gigabit controller just isn't good enough.

Surely you'd have to test it with two computers simultaneously?
C0R4X 25th May 2010, 16:36 Quote
Biggest Problem of NAS systems are their price and their horrible bad performance when transfering files to the NAS. I bought a NAS some month ago. It was a very cheap one (etrayz). Yes, you can put 3 TB into a NAS, and yes, you can stuff 8 TB into a NAS, but how long will it take to get transfered to your NAS? I think buying a cheap AMD system, which needs less then 50 Watts is the better solution. You get more for your money!
I mean, where is the advantage when you have a Gbit network but the NAS is only able to give you a transferspeed of 20 MB / sec? Try to transfer 1.5 TB to such a NAS, it will take you days!
Hamish 25th May 2010, 16:43 Quote
i played around with iSCSI when i built my current fileserver a year or so ago
when i reinstalled the OS on my desktop i cba reconfiguring iSCSI and just dumped the data into an SMB share
not worth it for home users imo, theres almost no advantage
Blackie Chan 25th May 2010, 19:40 Quote
I have iSCSI software on my server that shares my dvd ROM since i only have one of them. I can login into my dvd player from anywhere with the internet. The low bandwidth basically means that all I can do is jog the cd tray in and out. As far as internet file sharing I use something called HFS which generates a website based on the HDD structure. I can share pictures and music anywhere with this though my original idea was to use it to stream movies to mobile devices connected locally over VLC4iPhone. Works great, everyone should have a file server!
Pookeyhead 25th May 2010, 21:04 Quote
"We briefly tested the teaming feature with a motherboard we had in the lab, but found it didn't improve our performance - we suspect our mobo's Gigabit controller just isn't good enough."


Probably because the NAS isn't capable of fully saturating a single Gigabit connection, let alone 2.
fragg3r 25th May 2010, 21:45 Quote
I was wondering, can you share those block level targets via SMB/AFP at the same time? So far I only tried creating targets on an existing volume and it doesn't work for those.
roughrider 25th May 2010, 21:59 Quote
I am about to get a 160g HDD to upgrade my old laptop into a WHS machine (well, VAIL). I will put an iSCSI partition on a NAS for it so I can use PS3 Media Player forthings like transcoding, playing ISO's, but will use the otherhalf of the NAS (separate volume / discs) to duplicate the media files as backup, and run NAS software for things WHS dosn't do so easily at the same time (mostly the IP cam thing but may be better for some other functions e.g. hosting website for YAMJ). I know most people on here will think it's not cheap but the way I see it trust mysel fto get this working, and it is still cheaper than the £8k media server / movie jukebox I read about yesterday, by more than £7k! Also, a laptop uses little power, so do NASes, I coule make a media centre PC but I want to run a home server with low power needs not a whole PC if I can
alecamused 25th May 2010, 22:42 Quote
AoE is pretty funny too. Just to mention the "competition" :)
Pookeyhead 25th May 2010, 23:23 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by capnPedro
I'm still not seeing the benefit over regular network drives... and look, I can actually get the amount of free space reported correctly!

http://forums.bit-tech.net/picture.php?albumid=401&pictureid=10701


I'm not understanding that. Do network drives not report the correct free space normally?

Mine are telling me I have 1.88TB left... which is true.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b26/pookeyhead/Untitled-1-55.jpg


Explain please?
Nature 26th May 2010, 03:29 Quote
The very first picture on page 1 shows

Music Nas Y://
2.17 TB free of 445 GB

Does this mean you guys have almost half a terrabyte of music>?
Bindibadgi 26th May 2010, 05:00 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nature
The very first picture on page 1 shows

Music Nas Y://
2.17 TB free of 445 GB

Does this mean you guys have almost half a terrabyte of music>?

No, I explained it above.

My Windows Home Server box has five drives in it. The FIRST drive is 500GB in size - that's all the Windows 7 sees, but it is also confused by the 2.1TB "total size". It's just Windows 7 not being able to read Windows Home Server correctly.
logan'srun 26th May 2010, 07:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi

I know! It's a business box but the software is really very very nice. Still, I was just using it as an example for the guide :) I'll do an iSCSI one maybe for FreeNAS when I do our "build our own NAS" article, but I still need to blag some hard drives for a month to actually do it.

Well hurry up then!!!! I'm on the fence about building a server or a NAS since another site put out this great guide and makes it sound likes it's super easy and a even a monkey could do it.

Would it really take a month for you to get some drives? Aren't you the allmighty and powerful Bindi that's taken over Taiwan? Kip over to WD or Seagate at lunch and get some!
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums