Re: NAS raid with Debian?
On Thu, 4 Apr 2013 14:38:48 +1300
Joel Wirāmu Pauling <joel@aenertia.net> wrote:
> On 4 April 2013 14:05, Nigel Roberts <nigel@nobiscuit.com> wrote:
> > Marvell Kirkwood SoC
>
>
> Is it the SoC or the Switch chipset doing the heavy lifting there?
> What conditions do you get that throughput? The Kirkwood SoC's are a
> bit better than some of the rubbish out there, it is important to note
> that there are some good Marvel SoC's (i.e Kirkwood) and some Rubbish
> ones (i.e Amarda) I have seen them flail for instance with high
> numbers of IO writes (for instance bit-torrent, DRBD backing store,
> NFS as VM backing store) on synology X12. - Don't get me going on
> QNAP's
FWIW, I've been running Debian Wheezy on a Seagate Go Flex Net
(STAK100 - http://projects.doozan.com/debian/) for a while, with pretty
good results. It's a Kirkwood system with 128MB RAM, 256MB NAND, 2 SATA
connectors, 1 USB port and Gigabit ethernet
(http://archlinuxarm.org/platforms/armv5/seagate-goflex-net), and it's
perhaps surprisingly capable. It was a little fussy to set up (there's
some funkiness with unlocking the bootloader and getting it to
recognize and boot from SATA), and the SATA ports aren't physically
well designed for holding non-Go Flex brand drives, but once you get it
set up, it runs quite well, is very quiet, and has (I believe, though I
haven't measured) very low power consumption (I've seen figures of
between 5-10 watts). It runs about $40 (without drives) on eBay.
> Given it is a different arch, less hardware, less expandable etc I
> simply can't recommend people use them given you can build an x86_64
> low TPW style system for less than 200$ (NZ dollars). You do have the
> advantages that you get an all in one unit so there is that.
Probably good advice, but the plugs are tiny, quiet and very low power
(and cute and fun to play with, although certainly fussier and less
powerful and expandable than x86).
Celejar
Reply to: