well, I like it at least ¯\\\_\(ツ\)\_/¯
I agree though that ECC support would be really nice, and maybe a higher tier model with a faster CPU/bigger eMMC. But honestly for the price and the capability and size it's not bad.
Old thread but I found your comment when searching about the ReServer. Certain models are currently on sale: https://www.seeedstudio.com/reServer-Compact-Edge-Server-powered-by-11th-Gen-Intelr-Coretm-i3-1125G4-p-5088.html
I'm a little late to the party here, but we're really limited by the dual 2.5 or single 10gbe connection. With that in mind you can use sata instead of nvme with no performance loss. A single sata drive *almost* saturates 5gbe. Three in raid will saturate 10gbe.
So you could absolutely build a more performant system for less money, but probably not in this form factor.
So the reason why m.2 is necessary is because it has become the defacto standard for consumer grade SSDs. SATA NAS boxes designed for flash have existed especially the Synology mini or FS series but they are dying out because 2.5 SATA SSDs are dying out. There are rumors that Samsung is exiting the SATA game entirely and WD just downgraded the Blue SATA line, and both are actually not price competitive at the current moment to m.2 NVMe SSDs of the same capacity.
Can you find me a selection of new or at least readily available parts that can make a 6 NVMe system for $450 or 12NVMe for $800 with 10 gig networking?
A Dell R720 + 2-3x SuperMicro AOC-SHG3-4M2P provides 8-12x NVMe for $700-$930. Way more compute and RAM + ECC.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/256019770575
https://www.ebay.com/itm/363053027094
My dude... that is a literal rack mount server with a form factor, noise, and power consumption that is way out of line with what most home offices are able to handle.
That wasn't in your spec. You can size whatever system you want with surplus mobos, CPUs, and RAM going back ten years in a workstation form factor that will go on a desk and be quiet for under $1000. You'll have to use older hardware and do more work though.
Your point about power consumption is missing my point. I don't want to wait on a computer because it has a celeron in it.
> I don't want to wait on a computer because it has a celeron in it.
It's a *storage appliance* my guy. Not a workstation. Not a server. A *storage appliance*. Which doesn't exactly take a whole lot of compute power.
~80TB in a ZFS on spinning rust *coincidentally* in a 720XD. NVME SLOG on an enterprise high-endurance drive, and a small NVME pool made out of two more of the same drives mostly just because I had them.
Storage is a *negligible* use of my compute, even on this relatively ancient system. It's a very-much-not-negligible use of my RAM pool, though. But that requirement isn't exactly a *requirement*, rather a best-practices-for-performance rule of thumb, and that performance is certainly going to be bottlenecked by the 10Gb connection either way.
sPoKeN lIkE my butthole. Get over yourself. You're trying to compare a fucking **full sized 2U server** as a replacement for a *desktop NAS*. A device that will *average* 200W without *significant work* optimizing, after which it will *still* use twice as much power, take up 10x the space, and spit out 10x the heat. THEY ARE NOT COMPETITORS IN THE SLIGHTEST BUD. Not even apples vs oranges, but rather an apple vs a table.
I mean if that works more power to you. I don't want to debate anything, I'm just a regular enthusiast who wants to discuss tech. But this is just a pattern that's existed for decades now of people who live in an enterprise world suggesting 'cheaper' and 'better' solutions that are way out of the realm of reasonable and require significant expertise just to get working. Like come on, you knew exactly why these parts are cheap and exactly why most regular tech enthusiasts are reluctant to touch them.
Matters less if you're using ZFS since it's got checksumming by default.
If you're using this as part of a production system then there's a real argument for ECC though. Or if you just want to buy cheap server throw away RAM.
either pcie switch or possibly a tri-mode storage controller/raid on chip. something like this broadcom device : https://www.broadcom.com/products/storage/sas-sata-controllers/sas-3416
Some kind of pcie switch. the cpu does not have embedded networking so that alone will eat 2 extra lanes. enough on the 6 disk version but the 12 disk one needs switch.
It looks like a playstation 2 had a midlife crisis. Aside from that, my natural inclination is to shit all over appliances like this but try as I might, I really can't come up with anything. All arguments lead right back to the network interface bottleneck. Aside from that, for what you get they seem pretty appropriately priced.
28 Comments
Aromatic_Suit3618@reddit
narwi@reddit (OP)
capn_hector@reddit
Improve-Me@reddit
willis936@reddit
AnimeAlt44@reddit
froop@reddit
AnimeAlt44@reddit
willis936@reddit
AnimeAlt44@reddit
willis936@reddit
erm_what_@reddit
AnimeAlt44@reddit
willis936@reddit
cas13f@reddit
willis936@reddit
cas13f@reddit
AnimeAlt44@reddit
ramblinginternetgeek@reddit
narwi@reddit (OP)
Verite_Rendition@reddit
ramblinginternetgeek@reddit
Mr_That_Guy@reddit
AnimeAlt44@reddit
narwi@reddit (OP)
narwi@reddit (OP)
Soup_69420@reddit
Stevesanasshole@reddit