Re: [gentoo-user] Getting maximum space out of a hard drive

[Dale]

Frank Steinmetzger wrote:
> Am Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 12:49:56AM -0500 schrieb Dale:
>
>>> I run a raspi with some basic services, most importantly a pihole DNS filter
>>> and a PIM server. But I find it hacky-patchy with its flimsy USB power cable
>>> poking out of the side. I’d prefer a more sturdy construction, which is why
>>> I bought a NAS-style PC (zotac zbox nano with a passive 6 W Celeron). But
>>> that thing is so fast for every-day computing that I actually put a KDE
>>> system on it and now I don’t want to “downgrade” it to a mere server.
>> I googled that little guy and that is a pretty neat little machine. 
>> Basically it is a tiny puter but really tiny, just not tiny on
>> features.  The Zotac systems, even some older ones, are pretty nifty.  I
>> think I read they have a ITX mobo which is really compact.
> ITX (or rather miniITX) is 17×17 cm: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mini-ITX
> Those NUC-types are much smaller. I don’t quite know whether that board form
> factor has a name of its own (aside from NUC, but that’s a marketing name
> from Intel).
>
>> It sort of reminds me of a cell phone.  Small but fast CPUs, some even
>> have decent amounts of ram so they can handle quite a lot.  Never heard of
>> this thing before.  I wouldn't mind having one of those to work as my
>> OpenVPN server thingy.  I'd just need to find one that has 2 ethernet
>> ports and designed for that sort of task. 
> Many of the ZBoxes have dual NICs, which is what makes them very popular
> among server and firewall hackers because they are also very frugal. My
> particular model is the CI331:
> https://www.zotac.com/us/product/mini_pcs/zbox-ci331-nano-barebone
> It has one 2,5″ slot and one undocumented SATA M.2 which can only be reached
> by breaking the warranty seal. That’s where zotac installs a drive if you
> buy a zbox with Winblows pre-installed.
>
> After updating the BIOS, which allowed the CPU to enter lower C states, it
> draws 6 W on idle. It’s not a record, but still not so much for a 24/7 x86
> system.

I was looking for one with two ethernet ports but wasn't having any luck
yet.  I did find and download like a catalog thing but it will take a
while to dig through it.  They have a lot of models for different
purposes.  I did see a pre-made thing on ebay but can't recall the brand
that cost hundreds that was made just for VPNs and such.  It was really
pricey tho.  But, you plug it in, boot it up and it had evrything
installed and then some to control networks traffic.  It had stuff I
never heard of. 

I notice that several are made for home theater devices.  That's pretty
neat too. 


>>>> I have a old computer that I might could use.  It is 4 core something
>>>> and I think it has 4GBs of memory, maxed out.  I think it will perform
>>>> well enough but wish it had a little more horses in it.
>>> An Intel Celeron from the Haswell generation (i.e. 8+ years old) did not
>>> have AES-NI yet, and it reached around 160 MB/s encryption speed. I tried
>>> it, because I had dealings with those processors in the past before I built
>>> my own NAS. Your old tech may still be usable, but please also consider
>>> power cost and its impact on the environment if it runs 24/7.
>> I'm not real sure what that old machine has.  I have Linux, can't recall
>> the distro tho, on it.  Is there a way to find out if it supports the
>> needed things?
> cat /proc/cpuinfo and look for aes or the like. Or enter the processor name
> into wikipedia, which will redirect you to the “List of processors by
> <Manufacturer>” with huge tables of comparision and general info on an
> architecture’s improvements over its predecessor, like AES.

I have booted that old thing up and I grepped cpuinfo and no AES that I
could see or grep could find.  Must be before it's time. 

While I had it booted up, I checked into what all it did have.  It only
has 4 SATA ports, one already used for the OS hard drive.  I could
likely run it from a USB stick which would make all 4 available.  It has
8GBs of memory too.  CPU is a AMD Phenom 9750 Quad running at 2.4GHz.  I
found it add that cpuinfo showed a different speed I think.  I'll check
it again later. Maybe I misread it.  It's not a speedster or anything
but I may can do something with it.  It also has two old PCI slots and
one that I'm pretty sure is a PCIex16 for like a video card but it has a
built in one already.  To add more SATA ports, I'd have to use the
faster slot really made for video cards.  Guess it would work but. 
Also, it only has a 100MB ethernet port.  Fairly slow but I'm not going
to expect a lot of hard drive speed either. 


>>>> I may use actual NAS software too.
>>> What is “actual NAS software”? Do you mean a NAS distribution? From my
>>> understanding, those distros install the usual services (samba, ftp, etc.)
>>> and develop a nice web frontend for it. But since those are web
>>> applications, there isn’t much to be gained from march=native.
>> I've seen TrueNAS, OpenNas I think and others.  Plus some just use
>> Ubuntu or something.  Honestly, almost any linux distro with no or a
>> minimal GUI would work. 
> OK, but then you don’t run those on Gentoo. And those NAS distros are so
> small and light-weight, they can be run from a USB stick if you so choose.
> My NAS’s mainboard has a USB-A socket on-board for that reason.

I downloaded several but plan to look at FreeNAS first.  Just see what
it looks like.  Pretty sure it is BSD based. 


>>>>   I'm sure Gentoo would work to with proper tweaking but then I need to
>>>> deal with compiling things.  Of course, no libreoffice or anything big so
>>>> it may not be to bad.  Thing is, the NAS software will likely be more
>>>> efficient since it is designed for the purpose. 
>>> More efficient than what?

Bigger system with lots of software running and using even more power,
some of which may not even be needed. 


>> I figure something like OpenNAS or TrueNAS would work better as it is
>> built to be user friendly and has tools by default to manage things. 
> Yeah, I was thinking of using one of those, too. But I liked the idea of
> being more flexible with some ZFS voodoo which the web interfaces won’t
> allow. Like creating a downgraded pool because I don’t have enough HDDs, filling
> that up and adding the missing disk later. Sometimes I wish for the bigger
> ease of use of a web interface.
>
>> I'm pretty sure they support RAID and such by default.  It is likely set
>> up to make setting it up easier too. 
> They do, naturally. And yes, the frontends hide lots of the gory details.
>


That's my thinking since RAID, ZFS and such are new to me.  Of course,
front ends do take away a lot of fine controls too, usually. 

Dale

:-)  :-)