New HDD's for older PC...

[Erszm]

I have an older big (huge) box here that I'm wanting to make more use out of
again.

Built the thing between late 1999 and early 2000. Complete spurge on
everything at the time. You know the deal -- throw lots of cash for an
"ultimate lifespan" of about five minutes before everything starts to become
dated and end up just using it as a simple dumb file server a few years
later. Starting a couple years ago, I've began using laptops as my
"working" computers and my current laptop has completetly replaced my need
for a "working" desktop.

So now the big beast is just a file dumpster, but it currently only has 18GB
worth of HDD. I'm wanting to add more HDD space, as much as within reason,
but not sure of which type of interface to go with that will the deliver the
"best bang for the buck" and also prove reliable long-term. I haven't
really followed the "latest and greatest" of HDD interfaces with desktops,
so not sure if I should just use what I have or get a PCI controller for
[whatever]. I'd prefer to just use what I have. Files will mainly be media
stuff.

Supermicro P6DBU Dual PentiumIII m/b (100Mhz FSB, HIP4006BCB VR for
Coppermine)
Two PentiumIII's: 850Mhz, 256/100/1.65v/SL1 (Coppermine)
1GB SDRAM

I/O: Two (E)IDE with UltraDMA33 and Mode4 support
Adaptec AIC-7890 SCSI (Onboard): SCSI, UW SCSI, Ultra2 LVD/SE SCSI
Adaptec ARO-1130C RAIDport III Controller (PCI/RAIDport)


HDD's: Two IBM DNES-309170W (Ultra2 LVD/SE SCSI, 9.1GB)
I don't remember the exact cost, but do recall thinking that I could've went
with like 6x the same capacity with (E)IDE at the time. I did later add an
(E)IDE HDD, but it developed bad sectors within just a couple years. The
SCSI drives, however, have been grinding away for nearly six years now and
remain rock solid! Don't know if that is just luck or testament of SCSI vs
(E)IDE, but I'd say I got my money's worth in the long run. Found some
sources for SCSI U2W LVD/SE HDD's that checked out well on reseller ratings,
so considering just getting a bunch of these drives -- which would allow
full use of the RAID anyway.

Case: Sixteen (16!) 5.25" Bay Full Super Tower, with two 400W P/S's

Yes, this case is an absolute beast. At the time, I was so annoyed at
always struggling for space inside cases in the past, that I decided that
the next case would be the "absolute biggest one I could find". It stands
about five feet tall and is on caster wheels. Its actually a really nice
case though, with multi-level-butterfly side panels for easy inside access,
front doors with locking mechs, lots of flashy device LEDs and, pointless
I'll admit, 7-segment LED arrays. Very streamlined and "professional
looking". Often asked by others, upon their first seeing it, if it doubles
as a hot water heater or big de-humidifier because of it's size. Fiance
calls it a coffin and says if I were to die, she'd bury me in it. Today,
it's home is hidden inside a closet, taking up much of the closet. Threw an
802.11a card into it, added a Matrix Orbital LCD panel along with a keypad,
to give menu functionality for housekeeping tasks without needing to have a
monitor and keyboard in the closet too. Anyway, the case can definetly
accommodate a bunch more HDD's. (It probably could even accommodate a coat
rack inside as well.)

Just wondering, stick with I have (for HDD I/O) or start looking at new HDD
(PCI) control cards? Ultimate speed isn't a priority, just seeking the
"best bang for the buck" speed and reliablity wise.

Thanks!
E

 

[Rod Speed]

I have an older big (huge) box here that I'm
wanting to make more use out of again.

Built the thing between late 1999 and early 2000. Complete spurge
on everything at the time. You know the deal -- throw lots of cash for
an "ultimate lifespan" of about five minutes before everything starts
to become dated and end up just using it as a simple dumb file server
a few years later. Starting a couple years ago, I've began using
laptops as my "working" computers and my current laptop has
completetly replaced my need for a "working" desktop.

So now the big beast is just a file dumpster, but it currently only
has 18GB worth of HDD. I'm wanting to add more HDD space,
as much as within reason, but not sure of which type of interface
to go with that will the deliver the "best bang for the buck" and also
prove reliable long-term. I haven't really followed the "latest and
greatest" of HDD interfaces with desktops, so not sure if I should
just use what I have or get a PCI controller for [whatever]. I'd
prefer to just use what I have. Files will mainly be media stuff.

Supermicro P6DBU Dual PentiumIII m/b
(100Mhz FSB, HIP4006BCB VR for Coppermine)
Two PentiumIII's: 850Mhz, 256/100/1.65v/SL1 (Coppermine)
1GB SDRAM

I/O: Two (E)IDE with UltraDMA33 and Mode4 support
Adaptec AIC-7890 SCSI (Onboard): SCSI, UW SCSI, Ultra2 LVD/SE
SCSI Adaptec ARO-1130C RAIDport III Controller (PCI/RAIDport)

HDD's: Two IBM DNES-309170W (Ultra2 LVD/SE SCSI, 9.1GB)
I don't remember the exact cost, but do recall thinking that I
could've went with like 6x the same capacity with (E)IDE at the time.
I did later add an (E)IDE HDD, but it developed bad sectors within
just a couple years. The SCSI drives, however, have been grinding
away for nearly six years now and remain rock solid!

Plenty got the same result with IDE drives of that era.

Don't know if that is just luck
Yep.

or testament of SCSI vs (E)IDE,
Nope.

but I'd say I got my money's worth in the long run.

Nope, you basically wasted your money.

Found some sources for SCSI U2W LVD/SE HDD's
that checked out well on reseller ratings, so considering
just getting a bunch of these drives -- which would allow
full use of the RAID anyway.

Makes a lot more sense to get a couple of 250G IDE drives now.

Case: Sixteen (16!) 5.25" Bay Full Super Tower, with two 400W P/S's

Fark, what a waste of money.

Yes, this case is an absolute beast. At the time, I was so annoyed
at always struggling for space inside cases in the past, that I decided
that the next case would be the "absolute biggest one I could find".
It stands about five feet tall and is on caster wheels. Its actually
a really nice case though, with multi-level-butterfly side panels for
easy inside access, front doors with locking mechs, lots of flashy
device LEDs and, pointless I'll admit, 7-segment LED arrays. Very
streamlined and "professional looking". Often asked by others, upon
their first seeing it, if it doubles as a hot water heater or big
de-humidifier because of it's size. Fiance calls it a coffin and
says if I were to die, she'd bury me in it. Today, it's home is
hidden inside a closet, taking up much of the closet. Threw an
802.11a card into it, added a Matrix Orbital LCD panel along with
a keypad, to give menu functionality for housekeeping tasks without
needing to have a monitor and keyboard in the closet too. Anyway,
the case can definetly accommodate a bunch more HDD's.
(It probably could even accommodate a coat rack inside as well.)

And be a good kennel for the dog too.

Just wondering, stick with I have (for HDD I/O) or start looking at
new HDD (PCI) control cards? Ultimate speed isn't a priority, just
seeking the "best bang for the buck" speed and reliablity wise.

Then you need a couple of 250G IDE drives and a PCI controller for them.

Toss the SCSI drives in the bin where they belong.

 

[Erszm]

Forgot to add, that obviously it will be using a dual-processor-capable OS.

Currently WinNT and Linux are on it, but after getting a bunch of new HDD's
in it, it'll just be a single OS.

Thinking about SCO, as I have a box set here that I've wanted to throw into
something and play around with anyway. A dumb file dumpster would be a
good home. (Thats one of reasons was leaning towards just finding a bunch
of SCSI U2W drives, as they should be easier to work with in SCO than the
new stuff.)

 

[Dr. Anton T. Squeegee]

Forgot to add, that obviously it will be using a dual-processor-capable OS.

Currently WinNT and Linux are on it, but after getting a bunch of new HDD's
in it, it'll just be a single OS.

Thinking about SCO, as I have a box set here that I've wanted to throw into
something and play around with anyway. A dumb file dumpster would be a
good home. (Thats one of reasons was leaning towards just finding a bunch
of SCSI U2W drives, as they should be easier to work with in SCO than the
new stuff.)

If I understand you correctly, you just need a big file dumpster
with more space than you have now.

First, let me say that I cannot disagree more strongly with 'Rod
Speed' when he makes the laughable suggestion of tossing your SCSI
drives. If you're going to do that, send them my way! I'll happily pay
for shipping, and my big FTP box can always use the extra space.

My advice, instead, would be to start hunting around for a used
Compaq ProLiant series server, something like an 1850 in the floor-stand
tower case or (if you want something bigger) a 3000 series in the rack
case. No matter what you choose, you'll get built-in SCSI RAID-5 and (if
you find the right components) the ability to go dual-CPU down the road
(if it's not already a dual-CPU box).

While it is true that you might not get as much storage in one
spot as you would with the big IDE drives, you will get some pretty
amazing reliability, and the peace of mind which comes with knowing that
even if you lose a drive, you won't lose any data (that's the beauty of
RAID-5 arrays), and you can hot-swap the bad drive out when it's
convenient. The array will simply continue to operate with somewhat
reduced throughput until you do.

Happy hunting.


--
Dr. Anton T. Squeegee, Director, Dutch Surrealist Plumbing Institute.
(Known to some as Bruce Lane, ARS KC7GR,
kyrrin (a/t) bluefeathertech[d=o=t]calm -- www.bluefeathertech.com
"If Salvador Dali had owned a computer, would it have been equipped
with surreal ports?"

 

[Rod Speed]

(e-mail address removed) wrote

If I understand you correctly, you just need a big
file dumpster with more space than you have now.

First, let me say that I cannot disagree more
strongly with 'Rod Speed' when he makes the
laughable suggestion of tossing your SCSI drives.

Wota terminal ****wit. 9G drives are a fart in the bath for a file server,
****wit.

If you're going to do that, send them my way! I'll happily pay for
shipping, and my big FTP box can always use the extra space.

Makes a hell of a lot more sense to get a
couple of decent 250G IDE drives, stupid.

My advice, instead, would be to start hunting around for a used
Compaq ProLiant series server, something like an 1850 in the
floor-stand tower case or (if you want something bigger) a 3000
series in the rack case. No matter what you choose, you'll get
built-in SCSI RAID-5 and (if you find the right components) the
ability to go dual-CPU down the road (if it's not already a dual-CPU
box).

At a terminally stupid price compare with a coupld of 250G IDE drives.

The power bill alone makes the SCSI route terminally stupid.

While it is true that you might not get as much storage
in one spot as you would with the big IDE drives, you
will get some pretty amazing reliability,

You get that with IDE drives too.

and the peace of mind which comes with knowing
that even if you lose a drive, you won't lose any
data (that's the beauty of RAID-5 arrays),

That's just one way of ensuring you dont lose any data, stupid.

and you can hot-swap the bad drive out when it's convenient.

You dont need hot swap in his environment.

The array will simply continue to operate with
somewhat reduced throughput until you do.

And no reduced thruput at all if you have a couple
of 250G drives and buy another if one of them fails.

 

[Erszm]

in message

First, let me say that I cannot disagree more strongly with 'Rod
Speed' when he makes the laughable suggestion of tossing your SCSI
drives. If you're going to do that, send them my way! I'll happily pay
for shipping, and my big FTP box can always use the extra space.

LOL, yep, I hear ya. Tossing a good working drive, even if it is only 9GB,
makes no sense.
I was going to reply to his posting, but after seeing his reply to yours
(full of pointless immature insults), I'm not going to bother.

My advice, instead, would be to start hunting around for a used
Compaq ProLiant series server, something like an 1850 in the floor-stand
tower case or (if you want something bigger) a 3000 series in the rack
case. No matter what you choose, you'll get built-in SCSI RAID-5 and (if
you find the right components) the ability to go dual-CPU down the road
(if it's not already a dual-CPU box).

Man, I just wanted to use existing hardware, but now you have me looking at
these older ProLiants -- and wanting one. :^)

Even older Proliant DL380's, with dual 800Mhz P3's, 2GB RAM, 4 18GB SCSI-UW
drives, ect, are price approachable.

While it is true that you might not get as much storage in one
spot as you would with the big IDE drives, you will get some pretty
amazing reliability, and the peace of mind which comes with knowing that
even if you lose a drive, you won't lose any data (that's the beauty of
RAID-5 arrays), and you can hot-swap the bad drive out when it's
convenient. The array will simply continue to operate with somewhat
reduced throughput until you do.

Happy hunting.


--
Dr. Anton T. Squeegee, Director, Dutch Surrealist Plumbing Institute.
(Known to some as Bruce Lane, ARS KC7GR,
kyrrin (a/t) bluefeathertech[d=o=t]calm -- www.bluefeathertech.com
"If Salvador Dali had owned a computer, would it have been equipped
with surreal ports?"

I hear ya. Those big IDE drives are tempting, but looking at them the first
thing that comes to mind is losing 250+ GB worth of data in one blow.

Thanks!
E

 

[Peter]

I hear ya. Those big IDE drives are tempting, but looking at them the
first

thing that comes to mind is losing 250+ GB worth of data in one blow.

That's why you buy them in pairs. And check each of them at least weakly.

 

[Jeremy Boden]

That's why you buy them in pairs. And check each of them at least weakly.

I think you should check them quite strongly.

 

[Rod Speed]

Dr. Anton T. Squeegee wrote

LOL, yep, I hear ya. Tossing a good working
drive, even if it is only 9GB, makes no sense.

Mindless stuff. Anyone who has much to do with PCs has a
collection of old drives that are too small to bother with anymore.

I was going to reply to his posting, but after seeing his reply to
yours (full of pointless immature insults), I'm not going to bother.

I'll try not to curl up and die.

Man, I just wanted to use existing hardware, but now you have
me looking at these older ProLiants -- and wanting one. :^)

Even older Proliant DL380's, with dual 800Mhz P3's, 2GB
RAM, 4 18GB SCSI-UW drives, ect, are price approachable.

Dinosaur way to do a modern file server in your situation.

I hear ya. Those big IDE drives are tempting,
but looking at them the first thing that comes to
mind is losing 250+ GB worth of data in one blow.

Thats why you have them duplicated, stupid.

 

[Text]

I think one should have data backup.

 

[Dr. Anton T. Squeegee]

Wota terminal ****wit. 9G drives are a fart in the bath for a file server,
****wit.

I see that your manners are in no better shape than your knowledge
base.

When you decide that you can debate someone without contracting a
severe case of potty-mouth, I'll be here. Until then, please feel free
to implode at your earliest convenience.

*PLONK!*


--
Dr. Anton T. Squeegee, Director, Dutch Surrealist Plumbing Institute.
(Known to some as Bruce Lane, ARS KC7GR,
kyrrin (a/t) bluefeathertech[d=o=t]calm -- www.bluefeathertech.com
"If Salvador Dali had owned a computer, would it have been equipped
with surreal ports?"

 

[Dr. Anton T. Squeegee]

LOL, yep, I hear ya. Tossing a good working drive, even if it is only 9GB,
makes no sense.
I was going to reply to his posting, but after seeing his reply to yours
(full of pointless immature insults), I'm not going to bother.

You and me both. He just found his way into my filter file, in
fact. Pretty amazing how easily some folks forget that there's a human
being on the other end of any Usenet post.

Man, I just wanted to use existing hardware, but now you have me looking at
these older ProLiants -- and wanting one. :^)

<g> I suggested them because they're readily and inexpensively
available on the surplus market. I have four of them running at the
moment, all of various sizes, most of which came from Boeing Surplus. I
don't think I've got more than $500 invested in the lot of them, and
that includes drives.

Even older Proliant DL380's, with dual 800Mhz P3's, 2GB RAM, 4 18GB SCSI-UW
drives, ect, are price approachable.

Oh, most definitely, and they're still very usable. It's just that
the big companies want the latest and (supposedly) greatest, so they
retire what I consider to be barely-used equipment, equipment that can
be snapped up at bargain-basement prices.

I hear ya. Those big IDE drives are tempting, but looking at them the first
thing that comes to mind is losing 250+ GB worth of data in one blow.

One abbreviation: DLT. At least that's the one that's most
affordable to most hobbyists. I don't know any that have the budget to
afford SDLT systems, or the big multi-terabyte backup libraries.

Keep the peace(es).


--
Dr. Anton T. Squeegee, Director, Dutch Surrealist Plumbing Institute.
(Known to some as Bruce Lane, ARS KC7GR,
kyrrin (a/t) bluefeathertech[d=o=t]calm -- www.bluefeathertech.com
"If Salvador Dali had owned a computer, would it have been equipped
with surreal ports?"

 

[123]

\


I see that your manners are in no better shape than your knowledge
base.

When you decide that you can debate someone without contracting a
severe case of potty-mouth, I'll be here. Until then, please feel free
to implode at your earliest convenience.

*PLONK!*

 

[123]

Some gutless ****wit desperately cowering behind
Dr. Anton T. Squeegee <[email protected]>
wrote just the puerile shit you'd expect from
a desperately cowering gutless ****wit.

 

[Triffid]

I see that your manners are in no better shape than your knowledge
base.

When you decide that you can debate someone without contracting a
severe case of potty-mouth, I'll be here. Until then, please feel free
to implode at your earliest convenience.

*PLONK!*

http://www.sensationbot.com/chat-rodspeed.html

 

[J. Clarke]

I have an older big (huge) box here that I'm wanting to make more use out
of again.

Built the thing between late 1999 and early 2000. Complete spurge on
everything at the time. You know the deal -- throw lots of cash for an
"ultimate lifespan" of about five minutes before everything starts to
become dated and end up just using it as a simple dumb file server a few
years
later. Starting a couple years ago, I've began using laptops as my
"working" computers and my current laptop has completetly replaced my need
for a "working" desktop.

So now the big beast is just a file dumpster, but it currently only has
18GB
worth of HDD. I'm wanting to add more HDD space, as much as within
reason, but not sure of which type of interface to go with that will the
deliver the
"best bang for the buck" and also prove reliable long-term. I haven't
really followed the "latest and greatest" of HDD interfaces with desktops,
so not sure if I should just use what I have or get a PCI controller for
[whatever]. I'd prefer to just use what I have. Files will mainly be
[media
stuff.

Supermicro P6DBU Dual PentiumIII m/b (100Mhz FSB, HIP4006BCB VR for
Coppermine)
Two PentiumIII's: 850Mhz, 256/100/1.65v/SL1 (Coppermine)
1GB SDRAM

I/O: Two (E)IDE with UltraDMA33 and Mode4 support
Adaptec AIC-7890 SCSI (Onboard): SCSI, UW SCSI, Ultra2 LVD/SE SCSI
Adaptec ARO-1130C RAIDport III Controller (PCI/RAIDport)


HDD's: Two IBM DNES-309170W (Ultra2 LVD/SE SCSI, 9.1GB)
I don't remember the exact cost, but do recall thinking that I could've
went
with like 6x the same capacity with (E)IDE at the time. I did later add
an
(E)IDE HDD, but it developed bad sectors within just a couple years. The
SCSI drives, however, have been grinding away for nearly six years now and
remain rock solid! Don't know if that is just luck or testament of SCSI
vs
(E)IDE, but I'd say I got my money's worth in the long run. Found some
sources for SCSI U2W LVD/SE HDD's that checked out well on reseller
ratings, so considering just getting a bunch of these drives -- which
would allow full use of the RAID anyway.

Case: Sixteen (16!) 5.25" Bay Full Super Tower, with two 400W P/S's

Yes, this case is an absolute beast. At the time, I was so annoyed at
always struggling for space inside cases in the past, that I decided that
the next case would be the "absolute biggest one I could find". It stands
about five feet tall and is on caster wheels. Its actually a really nice
case though, with multi-level-butterfly side panels for easy inside
access, front doors with locking mechs, lots of flashy device LEDs and,
pointless
I'll admit, 7-segment LED arrays. Very streamlined and "professional
looking". Often asked by others, upon their first seeing it, if it
doubles
as a hot water heater or big de-humidifier because of it's size. Fiance
calls it a coffin and says if I were to die, she'd bury me in it. Today,
it's home is hidden inside a closet, taking up much of the closet. Threw
an 802.11a card into it, added a Matrix Orbital LCD panel along with a
keypad, to give menu functionality for housekeeping tasks without needing
to have a
monitor and keyboard in the closet too. Anyway, the case can definetly
accommodate a bunch more HDD's. (It probably could even accommodate a
coat rack inside as well.)

Just wondering, stick with I have (for HDD I/O) or start looking at new
HDD
(PCI) control cards? Ultimate speed isn't a priority, just seeking the
"best bang for the buck" speed and reliablity wise.

Bang for the buck right now would be 250 gig ATA or SATA drives. Five of
those and a good RAID controller and you've got a very nice server with a
terabyte of storage. Put 5 hot-swap cages in that machine and fill them
with 400 gig drives and you've got 10 terabytes, but you'd need multiple
RAID controllers.

Using old SCSI drives in a RAID would get you more storage than you have,
but I suspect that by the time you're up to 250 gig you'll have more in it
than it would cost you to just stick a couple of 250s in and mirror them.

 

[Folkert Rienstra]

Lol. Little Roddy got so upset he forgot to post.

 

[Erzsm]

"Dr. Anton T. Squeegee" wrote in message

You and me both. He just found his way into my filter file, in
fact. Pretty amazing how easily some folks forget that there's a human
being on the other end of any Usenet post.

Yep, he quickly became the 37th entrant into my troll filter as well. I
couldn't think of anything more boring to get emotional and insulting over
than IDE vs SCSI. Oh well. I figure such types either have some sort of
disorder or are just common trolls. He is a strange one and probably the
former. Definetly not the life of any party.

Oh, most definitely, and they're still very usable. It's just that
the big companies want the latest and (supposedly) greatest, so they
retire what I consider to be barely-used equipment, equipment that can
be snapped up at bargain-basement prices.
One abbreviation: DLT. At least that's the one that's most
affordable to most hobbyists. I don't know any that have the budget to
afford SDLT systems, or the big multi-terabyte backup libraries.

Yep, I definetly also have the philosophy of "less is more". The other
night ordered a bucket full of older SCSI U2W's. They will do the job
without needing new supporting hardware and I'll even be able to RAID.

Cheers!
E

 

[chrisv]

Some gutless ****wit desperately cowering behind
Dr. Anton T. Squeegee <[email protected]>
wrote just the puerile shit you'd expect from
a desperately cowering gutless ****wit.

Actually, Ron, it's obvious that YOU are the puerile one here. So,
the above is just another one of your lies. Pathetic, really.

 

[chrisv]

Pretty amazing how easily some folks forget that there's a human
being on the other end of any Usenet post.

The Rod-bot being an exception to that rule...