hi all,

i'm looking for reliable storage for my network, i need storage for vmware esxi and user data. i just want your suggestions that is a centos nfs,samba server on 1u/2u rack mounted server with raid card is better of nas box like synology/qnap is better ?

do these synology/qnap support storage for vmware esx ?

if i use centos server as i mentioned above with raid, i believe i can hot swap failed drives and can retrive data. is it right ?

recently 2 of the users hdds failed, by luck i have backup on other system. now i want to set up some storage at low price like $800-$1000.

please help me do it.

thanks in advance.

They are two different things with different capabilities. What you are planning on DOING with the system will determine which you should buy.
Since VMware ESX is a commercial product, have you contacted their support and asked them questions? They may be able to give you the best recommendation. And did you bother to read the product specs on the different devices?? Since they all support NFS, CIFS, and Samba, wouldn't they ALL work???
Only if you buy a hot-swap drive chassis with a good RAID controller.
It shouldn't be 'luck' that you have a backup. And if you're not going to back up your new storage device, you're in trouble already. Some basic math will tell you that a 1u/2u server BY ITSELF will cost about your entire budget, wouldn't it?? Not to mention the RAID card (which may be an add-on option), and a hot-swap chassis.

TB0ne hit the nail on the head so ill only add a few things for thought.

1. if you put together a CentOS solution you will have to maintain it, this is both a pro and a con depending on your skill, knowledge, etc of both the hardware and software involved.

2. comercial NAS devices are designed for what you are talking about, thus the (N)etwork (A)ttached (S)torage. now also keep in mind that if you are not using at least a 4 disk solution, you will have ZERO swap ability for replacing dead drives. This goes for BOTH the NAS and the CentOS solution with a real hardware RAID controller.

3. with a CentOS server you will have more options and more flexibility. This is due to running a SERVER v. Storage.

One of the first things you need to do is calculate the amount of data to be stored, plus the length you wish to keep back-ups stored (number of days), then multiply that by no less then 50% for expansion of data growth then run your numbers again to figure out what it will cost to get your backup scheme working.

Also it is easier to add additional NAS devices then it is to add new servers to a network.

1 members found this post helpful.

hi all,

thanks for you replies, i don't want to take chance. i guess nas boxes or nas devices will have less chances to firm ware failure and they easy to work with. Please suggest me few of nas box brand/models with around 4tb and raid 5 support. I googled a little and found

i/o mega (emc lenovo)
synology
qnap

since i'm not femiliar in real time with any othese device, please suggest if you have ever used any of device from above brands.

Thank you.

No, they are no more (or less) reliable than ANY piece of hardware. Setting up your own server is not a bad idea, but given your budget, it will be. Administering your server(s) are only as difficult as your environment/tasks make them.
Again, without knowing EXACTLY how you're going to be using them, what kinds of load, storage, number of users/applications, etc., there's no way to suggest anything. This is where YOU have to do research on your own, and determine what fits YOUR needs. Call vendors, talk to sales folks, arrange demos, etc.

Personally, if you're an administrator now who is not taking good backups, and is trying to do things on a shoestring budget, you're in a bad spot. Reliability costs MONEY, period. If you don't pay for it, you won't get it.

ive had great luck with the Buffalo Linkstations.

http://www.buffalotech.com/products/network-storage

again i would go with nothing less then a 4 disk setup:

http://www.buffalotech.com/products/...ation-pro-quad

looks like those in the 4TB range from about $475 - $600 or so:

http://buffalotech.pricegrabber.com/...num=LSQV40TLR5

Hi,

my requirement is only to provide vmware shared storage and few samba shares for users.

as you said i can go with any of 3/4 bay custom server with raid controller, my second problem is sceduled backups. these nas boxes have scheduled backup features. Let's say i have set up my own nas server with nfs and samba installed on it, can you please tell me best utility for scheduled backups like rsync etc... it should also have feature of incremental backup.

i searched in google and got lot, i want to ask you safe and easy one for my purpose.

it suits my budget once i went through site and pretty good. thanks for your link.

thank you.

...and that STILL tells us nothing. How MANY Vmware instances? How MANY users, storing how much data? How frequently are they ACCESSING that data? What is the network topology?? Without taking EVERYTHING into account, there is no way for folks here to guess.
No, again, no one here can tell YOU what is best for YOUR environment. And you really need to be aware that those NAS 'backups', just copy data from one disk to another...that is NOT a real backup. Backups involve multiple versions of files, offsite media, rotation of that media, etc. AGAIN...since we don't know your environment or your budget, there's no way to guess. There are MANY easily-found Linux backup utilities, like zmanda, bacula, etc....go look for a few, try them, and see what works. This would be a job for your company's administrator.
AGAIN...YOU NEED to determine what's best for you. YOU call some vendors, arrange demos, do testing, etc. If you are your company's administrator, and you're buying things for your company's data based on random recommendations (and you don't have a backup plan), then you need to hire a consultant to hammer these things out.

under Linux rsync is probably the best backup tool out there. that is exactly what it was designed for. also keep in mind that you should be running your VMs on a Linux server in the first place. then your rsync's would be that much simpler. oh and yes you can rsync to the Buffalo Linkstations, you just mount the device as a cifs mountpoint first then rsync to the local mountpoint.

TBOne is right you need to dig a bit deeper into how to best protect the data. as i mentioned you need to do some calculations to determine what, how often, and how long to store the data. Plus will you be using the NAS/Servers as file servers, if that is the case will you have the LAN bandwidth, and will the NAS have the read/write performance you require.

That can only be answered by you AFTER you perform the calculations.

lleb mentioned:
"now also keep in mind that if you are not using at least a 4 disk solution, you will have ZERO swap ability for replacing dead drives. This goes for BOTH the NAS and the CentOS solution with a real hardware RAID controller."

With all due respect, that is not correct. RAID 5 is available using just three drives in the Seagate BlackArmor $$) NAS, I use one at home (and yes, I realise that some people look down on the BA 440s with great scorn).

The BA 440 has THREE 1.5 T drives mounted as RAID 5. A few years ago one drive failed, and I was able to remove it and install a replacement 2.0 TB drive with NO loss of data.
Then three months ago, another of the 1.5 TB drives failed and I was able to remove it, and replace it with another 2 TB drive, again with NO loss of data.
A week later I removed the third 1.5 TB drive (the only one remaining of the original 3 x 1.5 T drives) and replace it with a 2 TB drive. Again with no loss of data.

I offer this bit of info only to demonstrate that some commercial NASs do work with only three HDDs, and they enable replacement of drives with NO loss of data.

Thank you.