Slashdot Mirror


Homebuilt 19" Mini-ITX Server Rack

TykSak writes "I started to build this rack with Mini-ITX boards almost 3 years ago and today it holds four 3U servers with a total of 28 harddrives. I made this site to describe the process of the build."

180 comments

  1. Summary by kaosrain · · Score: 4, Informative

    TOTAL SPACE:
    4643Gb > 4.53 Tera bytes (28 Harddrives)

    1. Re:Summary by Battletux · · Score: 1

      4.53Tb. Thats a lotta pr0n. (hell what else is it gonna be filled with?)

    2. Re:Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      bad jokes?

    3. Re:Summary by stephenpeters · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is going to interesting for him if he needs to fsck a large filesystem. His hardware specification couples large disk sizes with insufficient memory for fsck to load a large number of ext2/3 inodes during a pass. I hope he has the sense (if using ext2/3 at all) to split his disks into smaller partitions.

      With the current availability of large IDE,firewire and USB disks more and more people will hit resource limits during fsck processes. People using inexpensive systems such as the ones in TFA are unlikley to have the resources to back up tera byte size disks.

      Steve

    4. Re:Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      thats why i stick to ufs :D

    5. Re:Summary by pyite · · Score: 1

      Combine that with the fact that it looks like there are two drives per IDE controller and you have one mess of a file server. Lose one controller, lose two disks. NOT a good idea.

      --

      "Nature doesn't care how smart you are. You can still be wrong." - Richard Feynman

    6. Re:Summary by Chagrin · · Score: 1

      By that notion, you're suggesting that anyone using SCSI should use a seperate card for each disk? A little rediculous.

      --

      I/O Error G-17: Aborting Installation

    7. Re:Summary by Khazunga · · Score: 1

      For a system like this, I'd use a parallel filesystem. If on a budget, I'd go with GFS.

      --
      If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you
    8. Re:Summary by pyite · · Score: 1

      It's problematic, for one thing. I'm not saying what YOU should do, I'm just giving my opinion. A lot of people do it, hopefully they realize the risk involved. The other problem with two drives on the same IDE controller is speed. So, no, what I'm saying is not ridiculous. If you want to avoid problems, I suggest fibre channel shelves with redundant fibre channel controllers in them.

      --

      "Nature doesn't care how smart you are. You can still be wrong." - Richard Feynman

    9. Re:Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      better idea. two raid groups. one on the drives connected to master, one on the drives connected to slave. LVM the two raid 5's together. sure you lose another disk in the raid 5 math, but it's "safer".

    10. Re:Summary by AVryhof · · Score: 2, Funny
      This is going to interesting for him if he needs to fsck a large filesystem


      YEAH! FSCK THE SYSTEM!
    11. Re:Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hope he has the sense (if using ext2/3 at all) to split his disks into smaller partitions

      I'm sure with that kind of setup he's only going to do root and boot :)

    12. Re:Summary by antsquish · · Score: 2, Informative

      Given that it seems to be running Windows on all bar the router system, I'd imagine that fsck is a non-issue.

  2. Cool, but... by drivinghighway61 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is pretty useless. The mini-itx chipsets aren't really appropriate for server usage, especially considering the weak VIA processors and the high prices for the boards. I'd much rather just set up a couple of AMD boxes for the price.

    1. Re:Cool, but... by pe1chl · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That depends on what load you want to put on the server.
      I have been looking around for info to build such a thing. I'd like to have 1TB of raid-protected storage for a digital video recorder. Performance is not an issue, but I would like it to be quiet, lowpower, and not too big.

      I have not yet decided between building a standalone "server" or just adding a lot of disks to my existing Linux box.

    2. Re:Cool, but... by spagetti_code · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Perhaps - depends on the application.

      If its IO bound, these may function just fine. Given they run cool (low cooling requirements), quiet and with low power usage, they may provide a good mips-per-operating-$$. They are not that cheap on a $/mips from a capex point of view though.

    3. Re:Cool, but... by Orochi · · Score: 1, Informative

      I can see the VIA cpu's being practical in a firewall/VPN node within that rack due to their hardware accelerated encryption engine, as shown in http://www.via.com.tw/en/initiatives/padlock/hardw are.jsp but Pentium M based mini-itx boxes would be a much wiser, albeit pricier choice, performance wise.

    4. Re:Cool, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      This 19" server is aimed at penetrating the porn market.

    5. Re:Cool, but... by AccUser · · Score: 1, Funny

      Given they run cool

      I once told a mate that the VIA processor on my Mini-ITX board was good because it ran cool. He wanted to know where he could download it...

      --

      Any fool can talk, but it takes a wise man to listen.

    6. Re:Cool, but... by oldwolf13 · · Score: 1

      got a torrent for it?

      --
      If I can't smoke and swear I'm fucked.
    7. Re:Cool, but... by mcrbids · · Score: 2, Informative

      If its IO bound, these may function just fine.

      One of the servers I manage is a "backup" server that incrementally backs up numerous other hosts using software I wrote (in part) Backup Buddy.

      Basically, it's an old AMD K6-2 450 (yes, it's so ancient it's even AT instead of ATX) with a few PCI IDE controller cards and a crapload of IDE HDDs. CPU performance is irrelevant - it's all I/O bound, rsync over SSH.

      It does the job wonderfully, and has for a long time. I have many months worth of backups of all important hosts and data on this "backup" server..

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    8. Re:Cool, but... by imsabbel · · Score: 1

      Er.. you get the point wrong.
      The very fact that they are IO bound makes the via stuff a problem. (think of pci implementations, ect. HDs have 40-50MByte STR, but you need bandwith for the LAN, too. Add to this a typical 60-70MByte/s pci implementation of a VIA chipset (thats for desktop ones, those mini-things could be worse) you couldnt handle one modern HD via Gbit ethernet with one of those boards...

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    9. Re:Cool, but... by boaworm · · Score: 1, Funny

      I have been looking around for info to build such a thing. I'd like to have 1TB of raid-protected storage for a digital video recorder. Performance is not an issue, but I would like it to be quiet, lowpower, and not too bi

      Perhaps this is what you are looking for ?

      --
      Probable impossibilities are to be preferred to improbable possibilities.
      Aristotele
    10. Re:Cool, but... by karstux · · Score: 4, Informative

      How about this box? 1.2 TB (with RAID 5) in a neat little package. Since it's an embedded system, it should be ok in the noise/power usage department.

      Unfortunately, I don't own one, so I don't know know if there are any "showstoppers"...

      --
      Don't whistle while you're pissing.
    11. Re:Cool, but... by joib · · Score: 1

      Nice. I have a pretty similar setup at home, although I use dirvish and not backup buddy. An old Ppro-200 with a couple of extra disks.

      But IIRC it is somewhat cpu limited, or at least the load on the ppro box is pretty high when it is backuping, rsync and ssh use a lot of cpu.

      All in all, I'm very happy with it. Beats tapes and cd/dvd-r:s and it's cheap since you can get old comps really cheaply.

    12. Re:Cool, but... by Ryan+Amos · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They're fine, even ideal for home server usage. If you don't need the CPU power anyway (and honestly an athlon XP 2000+ is way overkill for most home servers) the power savings are nice. A file server doesn't need more than a crappy CPU and some good SCSI/SATA cards. This is especially true because the server will likely be on 24/7.

    13. Re:Cool, but... by dajak · · Score: 1

      This guy seems to be running his server in his bedroom at home, probably over a DSL line. The bottleneck is the DSL line, and the server is plenty fast IMO to keep up with that.

    14. Re:Cool, but... by dajak · · Score: 1

      The via mini-itx platform is great in small spaces where you want little noise, and when the available power is limited. You can run multiple mini-itx setups with one cheap ups, and you can run it on portable solar panels and in cars.

      Whether it is cheap from a capex point of view depends on the situation: there are valid applications for it in small inner city offices, in cars, and in the third world.

    15. Re:Cool, but... by DenDave · · Score: 1

      Not only that, considering the time and effort he put into this, it probably cost more than buying appropriate hardware. If you are going to custom build then it should be for performance reasons. A 600 buck 1u server won't have a powerful cpu but heck, at 600 bucks you can have two for the price of one home built (if you factor in labour and parts)

      I would love to have rack machines at home for the geek factor but then again, my dsl line is not sufficient for proper hosting, it is cheaper the way I have it now is one shared box with two buddies in a colo rack with a real connection.

      As a matter of fact, our host is quite competitive and he's a laid back kinda guy. Even if you are located in a different country you may find him interesting. www.vksis.net . We only use him for colo as his virtual servers are not really competitive. But 59 euro for 2u hosting is a decent deal. We currently have one box with two ips but we are considering putting two 1u's in the spot as the prices for 1u's have come down considerably.

      http://www.ahead-it.be/shop/configure.php?id=517

      has a few great deals on this side of the pond...

      --
      -if at first you don't succeed, stay the heck away from paragliding.
    16. Re:Cool, but... by StressedEd · · Score: 2, Insightful
      We have been looking at this for the purpose of acting as a backup server (disk space is running short). Came across a review which under due consideration I think rules it out. The application we have is for a set of redundent backup servers serving NFS backups. Since this doesn't support NFS out of the box it pretty much rules it out straight away. The lack of hot swap is also a no-no. In my opinion RAID is not much use unless you can couple that with a redundent disk which can be swapped in automatically when one fails. This is also not supported.

      That said, the one aspect of it I like is the ease of extensibility. Daisy chaining these units is quite an attractive thing.

      I have been considering some form of distrubuted storage cluster. In other words an array of machines which presents a single logical drive with redundency on a machine basis. Do people here have any experience with this (GFS et al.)? Care to comment?

      [shameless plug] In case anyone is wondering, the backup s/w is my own concontion yarbu. Which automates hourly, daily, weekly and monthly backups. I've been running this for about a year with ~1TB of backup under its control, spanning about a dozen machines. It's a lifesaver (not as fancy-shmancy as some others but very reliable).

      --
      Be nice to people on the way up. You will meet them again on your way down!
    17. Re:Cool, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you noticed the price on those things?

    18. Re:Cool, but... by OmniVector · · Score: 1

      joke
      1. Something said or done to evoke laughter or amusement, especially an amusing story with a punch line.

      --
      - tristan
    19. Re:Cool, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have found specifying blowfish algorythm for ssh reduces the cpu requirements significantly. For homebased rsyncing it might gain you some extra life out of the old pp200 and still be a sane transfer mechanism.

    20. Re:Cool, but... by th3space · · Score: 1

      It's funny that you mention that they run well in cars, because I was just perusing MP3car.com before I hopped over to /. to start my morning off proper.

      I just bought a new car, and had been seriously looking into building a box to house in my car (just imagine the drive to work with a pr0n slideshow rolling). By the looks of things, they primarily deal in the VIA Epia boards over there...hrm *ponders*

      --
      "How like you to drag your keyboard to a gun fight." - Aaron Bedard (BANE)
    21. Re:Cool, but... by dtfinch · · Score: 1

      A file server's processor only needs to be fast enough. Anything faster will have almost zero effect on performance.

    22. Re:Cool, but... by brontus3927 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Sure, sure. "Time is money" But how much is time owrth if you were just going to waste it? If it take me 10 hours to home-brew my own file-server, am I really worse off than if I spent 30 minutes buying one and 9.5 hrs watching TV? I would dare say the opposite is true. By building my own I gain experience, insight, and bragging rights. By watching 9.5 hrs of TV I lose brain cells and a little bit of my sanity. Hmm. Tough decision

    23. Re:Cool, but... by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      Weak? Remember a few years back when 486s, the "new" pentiums, and pentium pro chips were fine for servers?

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    24. Re:Cool, but... by DrSkwid · · Score: 1

      The VIA Eden / C3 processor was added to gcc in ver 3.3 onwards

      http://www.courville.org/phpwiki/Gcc

      I've had MIssing Opcode panics from GENERIC kernels on OpenBSD, FreeBSD and plan9

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    25. Re:Cool, but... by BcNexus · · Score: 1

      Ooh, ooh, I've done this before. It was for my former boss. He's a big HDTV fan and tapes his kid's hockey game. I built him an awesome box for video editing with half a terrabyte of raid-protected storage. It's easily scalable to about two terrabytes, but he only needed a half terrabyte :-) There're people who use more?!?

      Visit my University website and email me and we can talk more!

      Best,
      BcNexus

    26. Re:Cool, but... by drsmithy · · Score: 1
      The mini-itx chipsets aren't really appropriate for server usage, especially considering the weak VIA processors and the high prices for the boards.

      More importantly, the motherboards will have bugger all bus bandwidth (a single 32/33 PCI bus). Performance (particularly things like RAID [re]builds) will suck. That's assuming the awful VIA chipset can even handle so much bus traffic without tanking.

      Of course, since he's built the things with both master and slave drives on each IDE channel, performance is going to suck anyway.

      Had this project been finalised by using a single machine as a "front-end" to glue together all the space in the multiple "back-end" machines via something like iSCSI, NBD or ATA-over-Ethernet (ie: roll your own SAN) it would have at least have had some novelty. As it is, it's just 4 extremely slow fileservers in a rack.

      Some kudos are due from the industrial side of things - making his own cases, etc - but from the technology side it's a disaster.

    27. Re:Cool, but... by drsmithy · · Score: 1
      I have been considering some form of distrubuted storage cluster. In other words an array of machines which presents a single logical drive with redundency on a machine basis. Do people here have any experience with this (GFS et al.)? Care to comment?

      I am actually working on something similar.

      The Roll Your Own SAN HOWTO:

      On the back end, we will have "disk nodes". These are 1U or 2U machines holding either 1.2 or 2.8TB of usable storage (4 or 8 400GB SATA drives in a RAID5, 1.6 or 3.2TB raw). They will "export" all this space via either iSCSI, NBD or AoE (ATA-over-Ethernet).

      These machines will be ca. 3Ghz P4s with 2GB RAM and one or two 4-channel 3ware RAID controllers. We'll be building them ourselves.

      On the front end is a bridge machine (or more, if you want more redundancy). This machine takes pairs of disk nodes and mirrors them via software RAID. The resultant /dev/md? devices are then collected together into a VG using LVM. The VG then has appropriate bits of space carved off it into LVs which are "exported" from the bridge machine using iSCSI.

      These machines will be dual processor Xeons (probably Dell 1850s) with 4GB of RAM and (optionally, depending on need) an additional one or two 4-port GigE NICs. We are also considering Sun's dual Opteron v20z.

      The whole thing is interconnected by gig ethernet - with anywhere from two to ten bonded links on the bridge machines and one link per disk node.

      So:

      * Individual disk failures on disk nodes are handled by the RAID on the disk nodes.

      * Entire disk node failures are handled by the software RAID mirror each pair of disk nodes is a part of.

      * Bridge machine failures are handled by something like heartbeat (ie: a hot standby).

      Note: There is a practical limitation as to how big your disk nodes can be, determined by how long it takes the RAID1 to build. With a dedicated GbE interconnect for each disk node, RAID [re]build speed will be in the ballpark of 50M/sec - so a [re]build of a 2.8TB mirror will take about 15 hours. During this time, of course, the whole shebang is vulnerable to the other side of that pair failing.

      On the "client" side, iSCSI makes the shared space appear as if it were a physical disk - "clients" will typically be Windows or unix servers re-sharing the space out to desktop machines or other servers. We also plan to use GFS for a couple of clustered services that need to share common storage (although simple NFS may be adequate - testing continues). Theoretically it would also be possible to get iSCSI HBAs and boot from the iSCSI devices (ie: no physical disks in the server at all), but we probably won't be pursuing this path.

    28. Re:Cool, but... by pe1chl · · Score: 1

      Yes, I found that one already during my search...
      It is ok for 1TB but I continued looking further as it is quite expensive at this size.
      (5 or 8 smaller disks are more attractive)

    29. Re:Cool, but... by pe1chl · · Score: 1

      No, I am looking for a lowcost NAS box that uses 250 or 300 GB IDE disks in a small enclosure.
      The Buffalo unit is close to what I want.

      Video recording (at current resolution) requires about 500-600 kbyte/s and very few file opens, so no impressive performance is needed.

    30. Re:Cool, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A file server doesn't need more than a crappy CPU and some good SCSI/SATA cards.

      And ram. Lotsa ram. More ram = more data in cache = faster file serving.

    31. Re:Cool, but... by DenDave · · Score: 1

      Ok, if you spend your 9 and a half hours watching tv, that is your prerogative. Personally, I'll go surfing if there's anything remotely looking like swell. Failing that, i'll jump on my mountain bike. And if I ain't in the mood for any of that I will probably give my girlfriend some quality time.. Nah, we don't all live like troglodites under PSU's and server casings..

      --
      -if at first you don't succeed, stay the heck away from paragliding.
    32. Re:Cool, but... by Eternauta3k · · Score: 1

      I thought there was a 1TB thingy the size of a cigarrete packet

      --
      Yeah. Would you choose a neurosurgeon who pokes around people's brains in his spare time? I wouldn't.
  3. Slashdotted by Omicron32 · · Score: 3, Funny

    4 comments and already crawling. Guess we've melted a few of those hard drives then.

    1. Re:Slashdotted by ahsect8 · · Score: 1

      and annoyingly it looks like mirrordot didn't pick up anything besides the first page. Anyone have a link?

    2. Re:Slashdotted by Mad+Merlin · · Score: 1

      I particularly like how the site has a counter... I refreshed the page because I thought it hadn't loaded properly and noticed the counter had already jumped some 600 hits.

    3. Re:Slashdotted by BigDuke6_swe · · Score: 1

      Last time I stacked harddrives *almost* that tight they started to act wierd after a few weeks. After one drive failed I checked the diagnostics and it reported something like 60 degress centigrade from the discs in the middle of the stack. This looks like an even worse solution.

      --
      Zere vere zwei peanuts valking down der Straße, and von vas assaulted...peanut
    4. Re:Slashdotted by RawGutts · · Score: 1

      He did a great job on the case, but that poor website is gonna be in a world of hurt in a few hours.

    5. Re:Slashdotted by hcdejong · · Score: 1

      He's got some space beween the drives, and (on the file server anyway) a pretty big fan aimed right at them, using one fan to cool 4 drives. Doesn't look too bad to me.

  4. Wow by Jeet81 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wow that's soo cool having a server farm right beside where I sit. :)

  5. Power.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "This is pretty useless. The mini-itx chipsets aren't really appropriate for server usage, especially considering the weak VIA processors and the high prices for the boards. I'd much rather just set up a couple of AMD boxes for the price." - drivinghighway61


    I don't think this was designed for power ;). On the site:


    "I think the idea of having a 19" rack at home is every techs dream. This was also the case when I wanted to decomission my power hungry and space consuming server PCs and replace them with a 19" rack, but it seems that when ever the frase "19 inch" is added to any PC part the price skyrockets. "

  6. Stuffing Hard Drives in Boxes - SO WHAT? by rhyder · · Score: 1

    One after the other, we see people stuff a bunch of hard drives in a box, and end up with X Terrabytes of storage space. Impressive, no more than the individual drives manufactured that allow someone to shove a bunch in a box and multiply X Gigs to get X Terras.

    1. Re:Stuffing Hard Drives in Boxes - SO WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Terra means mountainous terrain. Tera is the prefix indicating one trillion.

  7. I'll be the first to make the redundant joke.. by ModernGeek · · Score: 1, Funny

    .. I guess we melted the Mini ITX boards he was hosting this on!

    Seriously, why does crap like this always get modded funny? I guess I must be new here.

    --
    Sig: I stole this sig.
  8. It's HUGE by bhima · · Score: 1
    Is it just me or is that thing over twice the volume it really needs to be?

    Still looks quite nice though.

    --
    Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
  9. wasn't built recently by Snuggly_Soft · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This sweet and economical rack was built in september of 2003. The project's worklog shows that the only changes have been swapping hard drives since then. It looks like a great file/web server. It's just not that topical. I'm waiting for a water-cooled Beowulf cluster...now that would be something.

    1. Re:wasn't built recently by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      and really is more expensive than it needed to be. a real rack is dirt cheap. I purchased my 4 foot rack with wood sides for less than $35.00. and bought aluminum 19" rack cases that handle 12 drives each for less than $55.00 each with power supplies.

      It's neat that he did everything himself, but I'd rather do it 10 times faster for 1/2 the price by buying all the parts.

      and for home, a single powerful server in a wall mount case makes more sense. At least that is what I sell on the side to the Home automation customers a friend of mine has.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:wasn't built recently by dossen · · Score: 1

      The cases? Would you mind sharing some specs and an url?

  10. Re:It's cool by Orochi · · Score: 0

    per TFA, it looks like floppyfw http://www.zelow.no/floppyfw/

  11. Actually, it is very useful by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Interesting

    At my house, I have a small box as a household/internet server. I am using the mini-itx/via. In addition, it has a gig. ram, and 4 hard disks (a 40G for the system/swap, and 3 samsungs 160G for data). This set-up is located in a very small networking closet, with minimal ventalation. The system is quiet, and produces just a little heat. Had this been an AMD, there would be a lot of heat and a lot of power consumption.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Actually, it is very useful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. See, what you classify as a server is nothing like a real server. Real servers do real work; your "household/internet server" probably does less work than a laptop, on a good day.

      A real server is nothing like your little MiniITX job. It's barely even a real workstation.

    2. Re:Actually, it is very useful by InfoTechnologist80 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Real servers can just serve out data on demand. :) This sounds like it is ideal for situation where you need to store lots of data at home.

    3. Re:Actually, it is very useful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, and where do they get that data and how do they serve it? Important points that you neglect to mention. Real file servers need to process thousands of requests every minute. Your Via C3 & Rhine NIC wouldn't keep up with network load, let alone the disk throughput. Real database servers need to process thousands of table lookups & inserts every minute; your Via C3 definitly would not keep up.

      The absolute most important thing in any server is I/O throughput. Your Via or Promise IDE controller doesn't even come close. Real servers have better throughput to their swap disks than your IDE drives can manage..

    4. Re:Actually, it is very useful by name773 · · Score: 1

      and do home users care if their systems can handle 8x the load they put on them?

      i would care if i owned one that could do that, because i'd still be paying for it, not because it would be over-capable

    5. Re:Actually, it is very useful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When did I say anything about home users? I'm responding to the guy who says they're "fine" as servers, because he runs one at home. My point is that the thing he calls a "server" isn't, and these little MiniITX's would melt under real loads. Saying "Oh, they're fine for servers" is a load of horseshit.

      If you're incapable of following the thread, just don't bother to waste my time by responding, O.K?

    6. Re:Actually, it is very useful by WindBourne · · Score: 1
      Working?
      • Web Serving (comcast cable).
      • E-mail serving.
      • jabber.
      • Postgres.
      • MySql.
      • Dhcp.
      • Firewall.
      • Squid.
      • Squid Guard.
      • File serving.
      • Storage of more than 200 ripped DVD Movies (I own all these with another 200 that I have to rip).
      • Storage of about 150 CDs (once again only CDs that we own).
      • MyTv for recording purpose.
      • Obviously, I have a tv card in there (hauppage).

      While I agree that it is not working hard all the time, for several hours a day, this box is working.It probably records for a couple of hours a day, with dish back of at least an hour.

      There are times, where we are recording, and serving up files to several desktops. It is a bit slow then (recording has priority). During that time, the Intel/AMD would be better, but my monthly electrical/AC bill is much better off for this.
      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    7. Re:Actually, it is very useful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Try again.

      You really need to quit it with the e-peen strokeage. As long as you understand the requirements of your particular job, you can maximize the dollar for the hardware that you need. Calling it a load of horseshit just shows your ignorant phb mentality. Apparently from your previous posts the only servers that you consider 'real' are the ones that run databases on them. Sorry, the only one ignorant around here is you.

    8. Re:Actually, it is very useful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a dolt. A "server" is any machine that is acting as a "server" by providing networking "services" or by "serving" data to client machines. No one ever said that this was an industrial grade server. I would like to see you go to a company that needs high volume servers and tell them that you were going to build one from scratch and paint it blue. Grow the hell up. The whole point of the article was a home server, not a high volume internet backbone. Your time would probably be better spent trying to learn something than spewing nonsense. asshat.

    9. Re:Actually, it is very useful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, I see. So I can take a desktop, slap a few services on it and it becomes a server?

      You're the sort of fuckwit that throws an old motherboard in a case, installs Linux and tries to fob the resulting mess off as a production machine. Then when your "server" can't handle the job or lets the smoke out, you replace it with an equal pile of shit.

      I have no problem with using a Mini-ITX machine on your home network to store your porn and l33t DVD rips, but I do have a problem with people who call these frankenstien jobs "servers". Would you call your desktop PC a "thin client"? Then don't use the wrong name for your little Mini-ITX porn storage box either.

  12. must've missed it.. by sinner0423 · · Score: 1

    thanks.. i would've looked around a little harder but it seems we've brought this homebrew server to it's knees.

  13. Pretty, but... why? by Joel+Rowbottom · · Score: 3, Funny
    Is it 1997 again already? I mean, *why*?

    It's nice building stuff on your own but this sort of hardware doesn't cut it when you're talking about servers, and I suspect with all the manpower the cost-per-server is actually *more* than if you'd bought it in its entirety.

    Places like Sight Systems will quite happily spray-paint a case for you or even etch a logo into it, and the 2U cases they do will happily house reasonably cheap P4 boards (they even do fans for them).

    Plus, 4U cases which take standard ATX PSUs are now less than £100 in the UK (you get to do the math if you don't live in the UK). Quite why "bloke makes a rackmount server using rackmount bits" makes Slashdot I don't know.

    Oh well. Maybe I'm just getting old.

    --
    Smegma.
    1. Re:Pretty, but... why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Maybe because you can only think in terms of how inexpensively you would do any particular task.

      The main reasons people use Via Mini-ITX is,
      * very small form factor
      * very low power consumption
      * whisper quiet

      These factors combined with the fact that many servers these days are not high traffic, makes this approach quite attractive.

      Remember alot of the work in these areas is by teenagers with computers in their bedrooms - hence the modding of systems, far beyond 'spray painting'.

    2. Re:Pretty, but... why? by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      You know, when I think "rackmount Mini-ITX", I think something like this.

    3. Re:Pretty, but... why? by Pollardito · · Score: 1
      Maybe because you can only think in terms of how inexpensively you would do any particular task. The main reasons people use Via Mini-ITX is, * very small form factor * very low power consumption * whisper quiet
      since you're posting this in an article about someone who made a rackmount out of them, it seems like small form factor wasn't an issue
    4. Re:Pretty, but... why? by forum__32 · · Score: 1

      What kind of person has the resources to get a real server for home use? Why would he spend thousands of dollars on SCSI or fibre channel.

      A "real" server with 4tb is going to cost quite a bit.

      This is obviously just a hobby for him, and the server is problably not nasa quality mission critical. Why spend more money then you have to?

      You must work for a government agency to justify this kind of spending.

    5. Re:Pretty, but... why? by NateTech · · Score: 1

      His was essentially free and yours costs $309. He got the aluminum for free.

      --
      +++OK ATH
    6. Re:Pretty, but... why? by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      That's why I said something LIKE that.

      If I were to do something like that, I'd build my own case.

  14. Re:Wow - Especially for the noise and heat by terminal.dk · · Score: 1


    Yeah, all the noise from 28 harddrives will save you a radio, which you can not hear anyway, and a heater, as they will keep the room warm all year around.

  15. you can 4.5 tera with just 9drives these days... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .... why nut buy them big half-tera drives?

    who needs the sound of 28whiners when it can be done with 9.

  16. Mirror by loraksus · · Score: 1

    A little foreword

    I think the idea of having a 19" rack at home is every techs dream. This was also the case when I wanted to decomission my power hungry and space consuming server PCs and replace them with a 19" rack, but it seems that when ever the frase "19 inch" is added to any PC part the price skyrockets.

    That was the end of my dream until a friend told me he was going to build a new 19" rack for his music equipment as his old rack was getting to small. So we looked into it and discovered it used the same dimensions as the PC racks.

    Goals of the project:

    * Low cost

    * Space saving

    * Low power consumption

    * High disk space

    * RAID1 space for importent data

    I chose Mini ITX motherboards with their size (170mm x 170mm) and low power consumption they were perfect for this project. I only needed to buy extra controller cards for the extra harddrives everything else was onboard (NIC/GFX).

    A little info!
    A "U" is the measured height of a server case
    1U is 44.45mm (1.75inches)
    19 inches is 482,6mm

    Oh, and yes, a counter on the bottom spinning while the server bursts into flame.

    --
    1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    1. Re:Mirror by Orochi · · Score: 0

      you forgot the obligatory: +++ATH NO CARRIER

    2. Re:Mirror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      or the obligatory reference to another type of 'rack' every tech would like to have at home.

      hint: its a frequent slashdot poll item

  17. Coral Cache by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    As everyone is melting the servers..

    http://rack.modzone.dk.nyud.net:8090/

  18. But what did it cost? by matthew.thompson · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Seriously if this was - Man makes own Blade server using Mini-ITX motherboards that would be damn impressive.

    Imagine having a home cluster in a really small space with hot-pluggable units.

    But this is just Man makes 4 PCs and puts hard drives in them - and spends more than if he'd bought the units anyway.

    --
    Matt Thompson - Actuality - Insert product here.
    1. Re:But what did it cost? by Lussarn · · Score: 1

      But this is just Man makes 4 PCs and puts hard drives in them

      And if this builder had made an space orbiter you would just ask the question whats so hard about taking a VW Beetle and put a rocket enginge on it.

      Clue, he did a fair bit more than what you summarized.

  19. Re:you can 4.5 tera with just 9drives these days.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure, you can get a better solution for storage, but the performance will probably be better with more drives

  20. Loud? by tuxlove · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't want to be within 100 yards of this vacuum cleaner.

    1. Re:Loud? by dajak · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't want to be within 100 yards of this vacuum cleaner.

      The mini-itx setups probably use so little power that they can do without cooling altogether, even on the power supplies.

      I don't think there is a more silent way of mounting the 28 hard disks, but the hard disks consume much more power than the computers. Cutting down on the number of hard disks is a better idea.

    2. Re:Loud? by tuxlove · · Score: 1

      Did you count the number of fans on that puppy?

  21. He made a rack..... by Meest · · Score: 3, Informative

    Why is this something to post about... measureing 19" is not that hard.... Hell i do it on a daily basis as i work in Pro audio/lighting.

    What would have been simpler to me is to just by a Mid-atlantic rack, get the shelving unit (U1 or U3).

    Find a computer case thats 19" tall. Throw it on its side. screw it to the shelf and then mount it in the case.

    Also could have gotten some 19" blanks and lined the back with fans/outtakes, put an AC Plug on there. along with RJ45 jack that goes to the switch. so it looks cleaner with less wires hanging out.

    http://www.rit.edu/~ajw8557/computer/rack/index.ht ml

    I think these guys did a much cooler job making one that this dude.... at least they did it with an old fridge!

    1. Re:He made a rack..... by ziggyboy · · Score: 0

      Good work, but it looks like a fridge.

    2. Re:He made a rack..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you sure it's a dude? At first I was like, wow she's hot, now I am busy retching (kidding)...

    3. Re:He made a rack..... by OmniVector · · Score: 1

      na, that's just a Utilikilt

      --
      - tristan
    4. Re:He made a rack..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's me, I'm the dude in the skirt. I figgered if all I was going to do was hold the tools and smile for the camera, I might as well look pretty doing it.

    5. Re:He made a rack..... by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Its even worse than that. He couldn't install handles because he didn't have access to a 'milling machine'.

      A milling machine? How the hell can you claim to be a hacker if you can't do anything without fairly expensive machine shop tools? Why didn't he just send an order out to eMachines if he was that limited?

      Did he not have access to a router? A decent one will only cost $30. Cheaper if you wait for Harbor Freight to put them on sale. A few scrap 2x4 blocks as guides and he would have a perfect recess for the handles.

      Did he not have access to a hammer and chisel? You can do impressive work with a hammer, chisel and PATIENCE. But that would obviously have taken to long to get his front page post on /., so he settle for a bulky, heavy object without handles.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    6. Re:He made a rack..... by zerkon · · Score: 1

      its pictures like that of a dude in a skirt that makes me afraid to admit i go to that school...

    7. Re:He made a rack..... by KasKyt · · Score: 1

      I admit it I forgot to install them before I painted and didnt want to take the HDs out before hitting the rack with a hammer but thx for noticing!

  22. Let me be the first to say... by po8 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nice rack!

    Thanks, I'll be here all week...

    1. Re:Let me be the first to say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks! I made it myself!

  23. Hmm by ZorbaTHut · · Score: 5, Funny

    "I think the idea of having a 19" rack at home is every techs dream."

    Know what I mean, know what I mean? Say no more! Wink wink, nudge nudge.

    Is she a . . . goer?

    --
    Breaking Into the Industry - A development log about starting a game studio.
    1. Re:Hmm by Andrewkov · · Score: 1

      I have a hard time saying "nice rack" to a guy.. ;)

    2. Re:Hmm by chord.wav · · Score: 0, Troll

      "I think the idea of having a 19" rack at home is every techs dream."

      I think you were trying to say "I think the idea of having a 19\" rack at home is every techs dream."
      or 'I think the idea of having a 19" rack at home is every techs dream.'

      Some people might get confused.

  24. 19inch by mr_tap · · Score: 1

    He lists his e-mail as 19inch@gamil.com - I would have thought that the pr0n guys would have been using that already?

  25. "Frase" eh? by Shag · · Score: 1
    Insert obligatory link to thread on grammar and spelling.

    </snarky>

    --
    Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
  26. more impressive by BoneMarrow · · Score: 1
    --
    Unfortunately, no one can be told what my sig is...
  27. Twenty-Eight harddrives? by concept10 · · Score: 2, Interesting


    My question is what is he serving with that much storage space? After reading TFA, I didn't what he is using his servers for.

    I bet one thing, his prOn selection on the fileserver is TOP NOTCH!

  28. File server, print server, router, firewall? by aysa · · Score: 0
    I would have gone (that's actually what I am doing) with one double core Athlon64 + XEN and multiple virtual machines. Less space , less power, cheaper, easier to upgrade, easier to back up.

    Anyway, the web server is melting :) I have coralized it

  29. the "U" in 1U by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 5, Funny

    "A little info! A "U" is the measured height of a server case 1U is 44.45mm (1.75inches) 19 inches is 482,6mm"

    Actually, the historical roots of the U are traced back to Bonnie Scotland. The U was the designation of how many sheep could be stuffed into the small slot of a server rack. The server rack would then be set afire as the rack doubled as a barbecue on the weekends. (This is where Al Gore studied the creation of the internet incidentally) The phrase "rack of ribs" was also coined in Bonnie Scotland during the infamous "Troy McLure Cuefest of '79" (1879) during a rendition of "Laddie, fetch me ha'notharack o them ribs" performed by, who else, The Scotsmen.

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
  30. I give it points for: by The+Wooden+Badger · · Score: 1, Funny

    Happy Hacking keyboard! I saw that and I was impressed, but then again I'm running a 900Mhz Duron, Yeah baby!!!

    --
    Heroscape, it's like legos combined with anachronistic wargames.
  31. Re:Negative? by thebes · · Score: 1

    Because clearly, he doesn't realize that he cut the life of his hard drives by 75% by stacking them 4 or more in a stack with NO space between them. That and the box seems to be made of wood. I don't know about Denmark, but in North America it wouldn't be too difficult for him to get nailed with an electrical violation.

  32. How does he fit so many HDDs on a VIA mobo by spagetti_code · · Score: 1

    Via mobos only have 2 ide chains = 4 drives max. And one PCI slot (although you *can* run two cards on it). How does he get 8 drives onto some of these things?

    1. Re:How does he fit so many HDDs on a VIA mobo by coaxial · · Score: 0

      Perhaps you should read the fucking article.

  33. 500W power draw!!!! by Rupan · · Score: 1

    Jesus christ. 4.53 terabytes and 500 watts power draw. What one person could possibly use that much space as of today? And I wonder how much his electric bill is ... doubtless at least $300/month

    --
    Ads? What ads?
    1. Re:500W power draw!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative
      Yawn. Call me when you get a clue.

      0.5 kW x 24 hours x 30 days x 0.10 $/kWh

      36 bucks.

      You probably spend more than that on cheetos.

    2. Re:500W power draw!!!! by squallbsr · · Score: 1

      But you forget that the A/C unit has to run more...

      So its probably more like $40/mo (pulled out of my ass guestimate)...

      In all reality - 4 computers, 28 drives on 500 watts is pretty impressive. Think about how much a full 42U rack with 1U servers filling it up - how much power would that draw??

      --
      Sleep: A completely inadequate substitution for Caffeine.
  34. Why does he need so many mobos? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As he has used VIAs I can only imagine the throughput and CPU power are not a serious priority. So just get one of those s754 boards with lots of PCI slots and room for 6 drives off the board. Add 4 dual channel IDE cards = 22 drives. Hell you could even just strap on a load of USB2 external drives.

    Big deal. /. material this is not.

  35. Wrong, wrong by hedgehog2097 · · Score: 2, Informative
    I disagree. There are umptimillion inexpensive Mini-ITX boards out there running servers, large and small. You don't need a lot of CPU to chug bits over a network.

    Mini-ITX boards drive the Internet Archive, for instance:

    http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/22/ 0418253&tid=198&tid=126&tid=137&tid=106

  36. Re:you can 4.5 tera with just 9drives these days.. by l_bratch · · Score: 1

    But lets face it, your e-penis is going to be four times larger with 28 disks.

  37. It's been a looooong time coming.... by Asprin · · Score: 1, Funny


    After working on this project on and off for over 2 years I'm quite happy and that I finally finished it

    Especially since - in those two years - the cost of rack systems has fallen into your price range.

    :)

    --
    "Lawyers are for sucks."
    - Doug McKenzie
    1. Re:It's been a looooong time coming.... by elgatozorbas · · Score: 1

      Indeed. It is a nice rack and all... but why? While I congratulate the guy on his workmanship, the rack looks like an imitation of 'what grown-ups are working with'. Why not just buy one, or take a job as a sysadmin...

    2. Re:It's been a looooong time coming.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who the hell would want to be a sysadmin. bleh

  38. Re:you can 4.5 tera with just 9drives these days.. by l_bratch · · Score: 1

    Actually my maths was rather bad there, 9 * 4 != 28, but the point still stands.

  39. Finally a breast option again ! by cablepokerface · · Score: 1

    Because that sure is a nice rack !

  40. Re:you can 4.5 tera with just 9drives these days.. by shani · · Score: 3, Informative

    It depends on what you mean by "performance", doesn't it?

    We have a database server that is limited by seek speed. For us, splitting our databases and adding more disks is the way forward (until we hit the next bottleneck). So in this case, yes adding more drives equals more performance.

    But, if by performance you mean "throughput", then you are correct that adding more drives will help - to a point. At some point your controller won't be able to keep up with all those drives, and adding more will actually give you no additional benefit.

    For instance, the Maxtor Atlas 15K II has a top transfer rate of over 90 Mbyte/sec. Even the highest-speed SCSI interface only has a throughput of 320 Mbyte/sec.

  41. Waste of time by serverroomguy · · Score: 1

    Racks are cheap - a brand new Chatsworth telecom rack (just 2 rails - you know, what you put switches and routers in) goes for less than $150. A four rail rack is a bit more expensive but not that much more, and those prices are the result of a quick search. Which of course means you could easily find them cheaper elsewhere.

    The harder part of setting up a rack for servers is proper airflow. Servers are designed to be cooled in a specific way, usually front to back. But there are exceptions to that. If you have some older Sun servers, be warned, they cool side to side, and putting them in a rack with sides on it will cause them to start loosing processors.

    Back to normal servers. When you put a rack into a server room full of gear, you generally want to have it setup to provide cold airflow down (or up) the front of the rack so that the servers can pull cool air through the gear. Then you want to pull the hot air out the back of the gear. In data centers or server rooms you set this up as a cold aisle and a hot aisle.

    As for this guys gear, it probably won't over heat (though I'd be worried about how he stacked the drives) simply because most small form factor desktop machines no longer put out enough heat to make it an issue.

  42. Just figured that out, eh? by dbmasters · · Score: 1

    Hell, I have been building my own rack cases for music gear, computer DAW's and such for years, It's quite simple and typically the home build case can be built heavier and stronger, you can drill and mount fans wherever you want...

    My last was a full desk with rackmount cases on both sides made out of beautifully stained wood with a granite top...

    Most rack mount gear whether it be for music gear, computer racks, industrial equipment or whatever is all 19", it 's not an IT standard, it's pretty much a global standard...

    --
    dB Masters
  43. Priceless by ebvwfbw · · Score: 2, Funny

    19" rack for servers - $3000.
    1 U server - $1500 (nicely equiped).
    1 Disk drive (of many) for 4 terrabyte server - $200.
    Weeks to load with content - 5.
    Look at admin's face when a new 4 TB software raid fails - Priceless.

  44. Re:asdlk by KasKyt · · Score: 1

    If you dont know what your doing you could reverse it and fry the drives

  45. WOW by tom17 · · Score: 1

    Some pretty simple cutting for the corner bezels and he gets it wrong...

    FTA: "I had some problems with the angles on them but that was covered by the bubble corners anyway"

    Dude, its just 45 degrees lol. How could he get that so wrong?

  46. It's on fire by dtfinch · · Score: 1

    Those hard drives look like they could fry at any moment. He has them in tight stacks of 4.

    1. Re:It's on fire by CityZen · · Score: 1

      Check his build log. He has had several HD failures.

      I'd recommend he put some space between his drives.

    2. Re:It's on fire by KasKyt · · Score: 1

      Several?!? Ive had two and one of them was one of two IBM drives http://home19.inet.tele.dk/jys05000/rack/4x3uracks /IMG_3959.JPG and ít failed after a short period as I expected it would (Those IBM drives had a relly bad trackrecord). And with the number of HDs Ive had, two drive failures is pretty low. But I will take your recommendation up to consideration.

  47. Every Tech's Dream by whib · · Score: 1
    Having a rack at home is every tech's dream....

    Until a year later when you have a single 2U server hanging in a 42U cabinet....

    Anyone wanna buy a 42U Dell Rack?

    Shipping cost is murder though.

    --
    -- www.WhereHaveIBeen.com
  48. $69 by dickens · · Score: 2, Informative

    Just had to do some googling after I read this. I was amazed to find that one can get a rack mount cases from $69. See here.

    1. Re:$69 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      How is that interesting. No offence, but you COULD make one allot cheaper if you wer a or kne a tradesman in tht field.

      Just use an old AC or refrigerator shell and do a bit of welding...

    2. Re:$69 by blogeasy · · Score: 1

      True. Rack mount really isn't that expensive anymore. You also want to consider what your time is worth to try and fit something together instead of just buying the appropriate hardware and doing the job right. I have several 1U and 2U machines now and I just use a relatively inexpensive wall-mount rack to put them up. You can get them for around a $100 from StayOnline.Com or other retailers.

      --

      Browse the Information Directory
    3. Re:$69 by PhaxMohdem · · Score: 1

      My rack setup cost me $30 shipped for my 12U floor standing rack. Found a 4U brand new Rackmount chassis w/ 300W power supply for $30 at a local auction, and purchased the 3 2U rackmounts off of eBay for.... You guessed it $30 a piece shipped. And those had powersupplies already as well. So grand total for my rack and enclosures came to $150. Added some internals, and BAM! Nice rack server farm next to my desk.

      --

      The Property of One's : "The Oneitude is directly proportional to the Colditude of the one." - S.B.

    4. Re:$69 by dickens · · Score: 1

      The link was to a 4U rackmount chassis, not a 19" rack. $69 is pretty low.. they've been in the $300-400 range. I'm sure you get what you pay for to some extent, but for home use this is indeed interesting to me.

    5. Re:$69 by AlistairGroves · · Score: 1

      Where did you get hold of a 12U floor standing rack for $30?

    6. Re:$69 by PhaxMohdem · · Score: 1

      Found a music guy on ebay unloading them cheap. I bought two of them one for home, one for the office. Just search eBay periodically for the term "12u rack" and you will find these periodically for similar prices. http://www.auctionspice.com/myroom/ has some pics of my rack setup.

      --

      The Property of One's : "The Oneitude is directly proportional to the Colditude of the one." - S.B.

    7. Re:$69 by AlistairGroves · · Score: 1

      Cheers.

  49. DUDE IN A SKIRT! by dustinbarbour · · Score: 1

    Holy shit.. that dude in the skirt just looks retarded. Seriously.. what's with this guy's fashion sense? He must be a Slashdotter. Perhaps he's even reading this post..

  50. OT: backup buddy by EvilStein · · Score: 1

    that looks kind of neat. How is the web interface coming along?

  51. Meh, Pretty but nothing new, by PhaxMohdem · · Score: 1

    Looks nice, thats for sure, but even I have a 19" rack next to my desk at home! Nothing new to see here. And my rack systems can actually COMPUTE stuff. No wussy CPU's here. Granted the power bill sucks sometimes :)

    http://www.auctionspice.com/myroom/

    --

    The Property of One's : "The Oneitude is directly proportional to the Colditude of the one." - S.B.

    1. Re:Meh, Pretty but nothing new, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, but when he started this project, mini-itx clusters outperformed Pentium IV's when looking at cluster performance and cost together. The rough estimate is 12 800mhz EPIAs > 4 P4's@2.6ghz, saving about $500 per set for the initial equipment outlay alone.

      Nowadays, you'd go with the P4 due to the drop in prices over the past 1.5 years, although the real problem with the EPIAs is VIA hasn't pushed the line or dropped their price over the years. This largely defeated the EPIA for becoming a good choice for nice cluster machine. It'd be better to go with micro-atx board and P4s these days.

  52. Re:you can 4.5 tera with just 9drives these days.. by toddestan · · Score: 1

    Because in 2002 when he built the array you couldn't buy half-terra drives. Actually, you can't even buy them now. The biggest I see on the market are 400GB, or roughly 372GiB for those fluent in newspeak.

  53. Re:you can 4.5 tera with just 9drives these days.. by fnj · · Score: 2, Informative

    You can use more than one SCSI host adapter (they're not really controllers), you know. But then your PCI bus is going to be the bottleneck. Heck, even a 64 bit 66 MHz PCI bus can only move 533 MBps.

    Actually, though, drives are constantly seeking; real world transfers are always bursty; so it's never as bad as the raw drive numbers indicate.

  54. Nice Rack baby. by Gerdazech · · Score: 1

    It is a well done piece of manufacturing. I am wonderinfg how the front panels were cut out so well. You can do that commercially at shops. but it takes time and a great deal of care to make such nice cuts with dremel. As for having a rack, well i've had a rack for a few years now http://www.furrystuff.com/~trapa/comp/gen-info.sht ml and http://www.furrystuff.com/~trapa/comp/pictures.sht ml for pictures if you really want to see it. Anyhow, rack mounts are not that expensive really. Rack computer cases are quite a bit more than the standard ones. But they also do quite a bit more.

  55. Anyone notice the power requirements... by spagetti_code · · Score: 1

    He's got 5 mobos, 28 hdds and something like the equivalent of about 3633GHz of processing power. (yeah I know you can't just add them like that, especially when youve got 4 copies of windoze sucking the life out of your CPU, but still...)

    All that for the power usage of a typical gaming system. 500W when all active, 235 with HDD spindown.

    I run a via system for my PVR - loaded up its 72W at startup, and stabilizes to 30-40W when running. Equivalent to a dim bulb - very nice.

    1. Re:Anyone notice the power requirements... by mink · · Score: 1

      His power consumption is nothing.
      I have a old p-200 MMX 200GB raid box (SCSI full hight drives) and it needs a 500W power supply just for the drives to spin up (with a delay between each spin up). I have a Sun a5000 FC storage array that consumes 600W supposedly but has 500GB across it's 14 drives (36GB max size per disk for this model)

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  56. Re:Negative? by ltbarcly · · Score: 1

    In soviet russia, electric violate you!

    All that would have to happen for him to get an electrical violation would be..... for him to do something that is in violation? There aren't alot of laws, if any, telling you what you are allowed to plug into an outlet. Not there are codes for buildings, but that is a different story.

    Thanks for talking out of your ass though, we all appriciate it.

  57. Grammar nazi checking in by digitalunity · · Score: 1

    it will cause them to start loosing processors
    You cannot possible have meant this. A women can be loose. A bolt can be loose. The only way to be 'loosing a processor' is by pulling the ZIF socket bar. I think you were intending to use the verb 'losing' instead. Please be sure to use the correct word next time or there will be strict penalties for you.

    p.s. If you feel you must construct a sentence with 4 or more commas, it is almost assuredly a run-on sentence.

    --
    You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
  58. Full Rack In House by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hehehe. Here is a link to my full rack built into a wall project. http://www.iliveinpublic.com/setup.htm/

  59. I SECOND THAT: MOD PARENT UP!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



  60. You would have done well, to read my earlier by WindBourne · · Score: 1
    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  61. Re:Negative? by thebes · · Score: 1

    Technically, it's against electrical code to build electronics inside a wooden box, which is what that appears to be.

  62. nice looking but by __aazofn1209 · · Score: 1
    It will be a nightmare to manage this thing. Twenty bucks says that after the first HDD failure the box gets dismantled or decommissioned.

    If you want a decent home storage server, get youself a nice AMD server board with a PCI-X slot, a Promise SX8 8-way SATA card, 8 identical HDDs, and use linux md software RAID5.

  63. Re:Negative? by ltbarcly · · Score: 1

    You idiot. Maybe if you tried to SELL it it won't be able to get UL approved. However, there is no 'electrical code' against putting electronics in a wooden box yourself. Until about 1989 most tv's were big wooden boxes that sat on the floor. Unless someone went around to everyone's grandma's house and rounded up all the old console tv's, we have an awful lot of violators. Not to mention old record players and radios. I don't recall RCA getting busted for the millions of wooden tv's they sold.

    But once again, thank you for talking out of your ass, since you clearly have no idea what in the hell you're talking about.

  64. Re:Negative? by thebes · · Score: 1

    Okay, I want you to do something and we'll see. Make a wooden box, toss in some circuit breakers, run 5 or 6 amps through it and invite an electrician over to approve it as a breaker box and let me know the results.

  65. Re:Negative? by ltbarcly · · Score: 1

    Listen Captain Stupid.

    You get electricians to approve things which are PART OF A BUILDING. You don't get consumer electronics you build yourself and plug into an outlet approved.

    Listen one more time! If it is inside the wall it has to be built to code, if it is plugged in to an outlet THEN NOT.

    When you buy a new TV do you invite an electrician over to approve it as a breaker box? Dumbshit.

  66. Re:Negative? by thebes · · Score: 1

    I never said he had to get his box approved. I did say that if it was checked out by an electrician, it would be considered an unsafe appliance. If you make modifications to your TV or any other device, or build a device like a server rack made of wood, and it catches on fire and it can be proven, then chances are you can kiss your insurance goodbye.

  67. Re:Negative? by ltbarcly · · Score: 1

    You ass. You said that in north america he could 'get nailed with an electrical code violation'. Now you're trying to say something different. First you say it is illegal to do it, now you say that it *might* not get your insurance money if something goes wrong.

    You're one of those people with a pathological need to always be right, even when you're wrong. How's that working for you?