Full Drive
- Thread starter LunarMist
- Start date
mubs
0
Windows' built-in defragger prefers 20% free, and I believe 15% is the absolute bottom figure. 3rd party defraggers may work with less; IIRC one of them (DiskKeeper?) works even with only 10% free.
708 MB free out of 500 GB works out to less than 0.15%. I'd say no defragger, built-in or otherwise, will find that sufficient. You'll have to move enough stuff off the drive, defrag, then copy the moved stuff back. :crap:
708 MB free out of 500 GB works out to less than 0.15%. I'd say no defragger, built-in or otherwise, will find that sufficient. You'll have to move enough stuff off the drive, defrag, then copy the moved stuff back. :crap:
mubs
0
I have a JBOD array of 4 750GB with ~960MB free in my backup server...the whole reason for JBODing them was so I could fill them more and not mess up my filing system.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
One of my holiday-season projects is to pack 16 400GB or 500GB hard disks into a single (wood!) cabinet... I'm still trying to figure out how disk controller situation will work (probably 8 ports onboard + 8 on a PCI/PCIe card), but I really want to ditch some complete systems if it's possible for me to do so.
mubs
0
Isn't there a performance penalty for filling up a disk beyond 70%? Of course this doesn't matter if the data is just archived on the drives with zero to infrequent access.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
There is a performance hit when your MFT (on Windows) becomes fragmented, which seems to happen when the drive gets more than 75% full. In my case I don't particularly care: I just want all my stuff to be online. It could be on 900rpm drives for all I care, as long as I don't have to find and take out a disc, then insert it in a computer, it's fine.
That would be nice, but how is it backed up and how do you stand the noise? The problem I have is too many 250-300GB drives, worth nothing to sell, vs. buying a bunch of 500GB or larger drives. Now I have only five 500GB drives (one external only) and a couple of 750GB drives (ATA), a couple of 400GB drives and everything else is smaller. Maybe 500GB drives will become more affordable soon.
The best way to backup a large array is with another large array. My primary array is 6x500GB, and is backed up to a 4x750GB array. I'm still convinced that my server chassis (Coolermaster Stacker) full of Supermicro SATA hotswap enclosures (5-in-3) and a pair of Seasonic 600W Power Supplies is ideal.
20 Hot-Swappable Hard drives in a tower chassis with incredible cooling capability (if you remove the front control panel). It's not even loud if you swap all the enclosure fans with my favorite 120mm fans.
20 Hot-Swappable Hard drives in a tower chassis with incredible cooling capability (if you remove the front control panel). It's not even loud if you swap all the enclosure fans with my favorite 120mm fans.
Just because I felt like it, I just threw together the following:
And, of course, you need 2 of them for redundancy
Code:
1 Cooler Master Stacker $145.00
4 Supermicro CSE-M35T-1 SATA Enclosure $520.00
5 Scythe S-Flex SFF21D 120mm Fan $75.00
20 Seagate 7200.10 750GB SATA - OEM $6,800.00
1 Areca ARC-1260 PCI-Express 16-Port $930.00
2 Seasonic S12-600 ATX12V $290.00
1 Gigabyte GA-M61PM-S2 $75.00
1 AMD Sempron 2800+ AM2 $44.00
2 Corsair ValueSelect 256MB DDR2 $60.00
Total: $8,939.00
Capacity: 15TB
$/TB: $595.93And, of course, you need 2 of them for redundancy
Buck
0
Of course.
Not that I belong in a technical support type thread, but do you realize how much Scotch we could buy for the bar with that type of a budget? We could even include a separate cooler just for whisky distilled north of Hadrian's Wall.
David,
Do you have all of the data on one RAID 5 array and then the backup on another array? That would be too much risk for me as arrays can become corrupted when drives are kicked out or controllers can fail. Unless the second array is in a separate location from the primary, there would need to be a third backup of some kind for catastrophe recovery from a natural disaster (AOG) or human meddling (perhaps vengeful SO, etc.).
Do you have all of the data on one RAID 5 array and then the backup on another array? That would be too much risk for me as arrays can become corrupted when drives are kicked out or controllers can fail. Unless the second array is in a separate location from the primary, there would need to be a third backup of some kind for catastrophe recovery from a natural disaster (AOG) or human meddling (perhaps vengeful SO, etc.).
Bozo
0
I usually use this fan: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16835129033
It's temperature controlled.
Bozo :joker:
It's temperature controlled.
Bozo :joker:
Lunar,
Both arrays are JBOD (no redundancy), but are in seperate locations with scheduled backups between. This is plenty reliable for anything shy of a datacenter IMHO (no single point of failure).
Bozo,
I like quiet computers. Not just quiet when idle, but quiet full-stop. Therefore temperature controlled fans get me nowhere. I'd much rather have the quietest fans I can get, then control them myself down to an inaudible level and leave them there. If they are unable to keep my load cool when spinning at that speed, I designed something wrong.
Both arrays are JBOD (no redundancy), but are in seperate locations with scheduled backups between. This is plenty reliable for anything shy of a datacenter IMHO (no single point of failure).
Bozo,
I like quiet computers. Not just quiet when idle, but quiet full-stop. Therefore temperature controlled fans get me nowhere. I'd much rather have the quietest fans I can get, then control them myself down to an inaudible level and leave them there. If they are unable to keep my load cool when spinning at that speed, I designed something wrong.
Of course if I spent $20K on the storage servers, where would there be funds for the trips to obtain the images? The HDs would be empty.
If you were to fill them with pictures of your cats, you wouldn't need to travel
Those are, of course, taken to the max. But having 2 systems, each with a non-redundant array on them,is a pretty reliable storage system.
Those are, of course, taken to the max. But having 2 systems, each with a non-redundant array on them,is a pretty reliable storage system.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
Lunar, what I do is this: I have one machine with a high end controller that can support a massive number of disks in a RAID10 arrangement and a large amount of storage.
I have secondary PCs that have smaller (though by most people's thinking, still staggering) RAID0 arrays.
The "smaller" arrays are where content is downloaded or created. A regular process scans the small arrays and synchronizes new files on the bigger array. The end result is that I have basically THREE copies of any file I care about, and spread over multiple PCs so that things like controller favors shouldn't be a major recovery issue.
If I were to break it all out, I probably have something like 20TB of disk space, but it's massively redundant, so it's really more like 8TB of usable space.
I have secondary PCs that have smaller (though by most people's thinking, still staggering) RAID0 arrays.
The "smaller" arrays are where content is downloaded or created. A regular process scans the small arrays and synchronizes new files on the bigger array. The end result is that I have basically THREE copies of any file I care about, and spread over multiple PCs so that things like controller favors shouldn't be a major recovery issue.
If I were to break it all out, I probably have something like 20TB of disk space, but it's massively redundant, so it's really more like 8TB of usable space.