Q 1: Is this a good idea and if so what got-chas are there to think about? One to back up WHS2011 to pool1 the other pool2 would contain I would use the SuperMicro box with 16 GB memory to run SE11 with WHS2011 as VM. So what I like to do is to combine WHS2011 with SE11 into a single server. WHS2011 is hard to beat to backup WIN PCs while ZFS seems to be the most advanced and robust file system. What I am interested in is combing the best of both worlds. Real works for a home system I am not sure but that is not that important right now. no chkdsk needed & encryption built in, for example.
I am very impressed with the ZFZ filesystem & its snapshot capabilities which is far more robust than the windows NTFS files, e.g. With 8GB of memory (also overkill but doesn't hurt). The SE11 box is fairly powerfull as it uses the SuperMicro Micro-ATX X9SCM-F with 16 GB of ECC memory which is overkill as a backup solution (although I also use the box to get ot know various LINUX distros) while the WHS2011 box is an Intel mini-itx DH57JG I like my current setup and I learned a lot building it since I was totally new to UNIX & WHS, although since I am the only SE11 user UNIX setup it not as complicated.
I am backing up WHS shares to another PC running Solaris Express 11 with 6 disks in RAIDZ2 (2 disks can fail without loosingĪny data) mode using the ZFS file system with encryption on.
With the potential to stick 18TB of raw storage in the hard drive cage and still keep it all at a reasonable temperature, it’s extremely difficult to look past the Fractal Design Array R2.I am currently running WHS2011 using RAID 5 (RocketRAID 2720) with 5 Samsung (204s) 2TB drives without issues for the past 3 months. It’s one of the few mini-ITX cases available that can hold the amount of hard drives that it can. Those of you that are interested in NAS, and want to build it from the ground up, keep the R2 in mind. The Array R2 will fit right at home with those of you that run more than one than a couple of machines on your home network. It was a bit cramped but nothing that would cause me to personally shy away from choosing it for my next small form factor build. That said, we used the R2 as a home server machine, running Windows Home Server 2011 for our testing and in that scenario, the Array performed admirably. This opens up the chassis to other, more adventurous souls and could potentially make a great LAN box if you can keep your hardware below the level that the PSU can power.
As stated earlier, one could install a double slot GPU, assuming it will fit lengthwise – but the option is there. The Fractal Array R2 is an exceptional case when used for what it was designed for. The drives certainly benefitted from the 140mm fan at the front of the Array R2 and never ventured anywhere near dangerous territory.
The two WD Green drives hovered around 42☌ during testing and the WD 640 Caviar was a tick higher at 44☌. The hard drives faired just as well, never fluctuating more than a couple of degrees in either direction. I would say that given the limited capabilities of the stock Intel heatsink, the Array R2 is more than able to feed cooler outside air, allowing even a minimal cooling solution to work at a reasonable level. While not stellar, the temperatures are well within the Intel-specified thermal envelope, and keep in mind, this was with the tiny stock fan that came with the CPU. At the tail end of the run, I record the temperatures of the CPU using Real Temp. As always, the procedure is me running it for a set amount of time in this case, 30 minutes. While an older app, it has always served me well when trying to stress a CPU to get a temperature reading under load. For the R2, I started a pair of instances of CPU Burn-in (one for each core). Testing the cooling capacity of the Array R2 was done in a similar fashion to other chassis reviews I have done over the years.