Mac Mini as OSX Server + GlobalSan iSCSI
-
@ntoxicator said:
Nothing is perfect for systems. Unless straight Linux server. But then have limitations or script your own and use open source projects
can I setup linux server for Samba shares? Absolutely. Will it work? Sure...
Will there be limitations.. absolutely.
Looking to simplify their network and not have a phone call each day.
Actually, in theory, a Linux server can beat the Mac Mini server in every way. More reliable, lower cost, high performance. Other than your effort in setting it up, which might alone be easier, there is a good chance that it would beat the Mac Mini in every way.
-
@ntoxicator said:
What about read/write capability though?
Of what? Sorry but I lost the context on this question
-
Did I miss the answer as to why you're not going to a cloud solution?
-
@Dashrender said:
Did I miss the answer as to why you're not going to a cloud solution?
Speed, I think.
-
They have a cloud based one today and don't like it. Not that another wouldn't be better, but DropBox isn't bad as those things go.
-
Right, speed is a factor here. And they're not happy with dropbox. Years ago they had a SMB windows server that did file Shares. Then they moved to dropbox (never my suggestion) and have griped since.
As you know, dropbox installs locally on machine and uses disk space to locally sync the files to local machine(s). Not cool when they have over 500GB of data. Fills up drives fast.
I just seen Mac OSX server to be faster & easier to "turn up" and hit ground running for OpenDirectory, SMB shares and "Group Policy" like settings.
i'm all for hearing suggestive alternative solutions!
But right now thought process is Mac mini + DAS (if can find one having features.. looking at drobo now)
-
Read/write capability was in regards to the drive being HFS+ file system. Even with SMB share option checked on mac mini. This allows for read/write capability from Windows hosts?
I thought would be able to write to the drive from Windows because being HFS+.. or is that ONLY if the HFS+ formatted drive was directly connected to a Windows/linux machine?
-
@ntoxicator It can write to the drive over SMB. Windows doesn't natively have the driver to write/read hfs+ so it cant access the file system directly attached. Going over the SMB protocol windows doesn't care what the file system is, that is not its job.
-
Gotcha.. Thats what I originally thought. As I use to use SAMBA as file share server years ago and was fine for my windows hosts.
So then could really do away with dropbox up-sync. Unless they decide to keep 1-user account for backup purpose. Otherwise, all shares could be accessed over the Site to Site VPN tunnels
Still not truely seeing a good DAS thunderbolt unit. The Drobo 5D is a good contender. Alot of bad reviews; but appears to be from folks using it with Windows system with USB3.0. reviews for device connected over thunderbolt appear to be positive.
Unsure about their Hybrid Raid (RAID-6) setup though.
-
@ntoxicator said:
Gotcha.. Thats what I originally thought. As I use to use SAMBA as file share server years ago and was fine for my windows hosts.
So then could really do away with dropbox up-sync. Unless they decide to keep 1-user account for backup purpose. Otherwise, all shares could be accessed over the Site to Site VPN tunnels
Still not truely seeing a good DAS thunderbolt unit. The Drobo 5D is a good contender. Alot of bad reviews; but appears to be from folks using it with Windows system with USB3.0. reviews for device connected over thunderbolt appear to be positive.
Unsure about their Hybrid Raid (RAID-6) setup though.
Any storage connected with USB - doesn't matter which version - is just a disappointment, and it's not restricted to Drobo.
Use SSD caching and stop worrying about RAID levels (as long as it's not RAID 5). -
Is speed really the issue? or the amount of storage that Drop Box takes?
What type and size files are we talking about here?
Why are you looking to share storage from a MAC mini? Why not just a plain jane NAS?
-
Speed would help, but would want to propose a solution that would be worth its value in 2-3 years, ROI
its essentially space drop-box takes on local workstations and the sync issues they experience.
File sizes are company PDF's, Images (alot of images), movies, word docs, spreadsheets... normal stuff.
Share storage from mac? So SSO will work on mac environment.
Can I create SMB Share from the Synology NAS? Yep.
Would creating Shares directly from Synology NAS be easier: Sure
But then I would have to goto each work station and manually add the network shares.
I do not trust LDAP connectors on third party products. Be better to manage it directly from Mac OS Server.app
Can the Synology NAS support AFP Time Machine network backups? Yep.. Planned on using it.
Also Planned on using the mac Mini server for NetInstall & NetRestore setup procedures.
-
@ntoxicator said:
But then I would have to goto each work station and manually add the network shares.
How do you not by using a Mac mini?
-
@Dashrender said:
u not by using a
Setting up user profiles and drive maps upon user login. Similar to that of GPO policies on Windows Server
-
What would others here propose then? The client just keep using dropbox and forget about other options? everyone has their own opinion.
keep in mind - the offices converted to Mac OSX desktops - at direction of management.
-
If you don't need a sync client, I'd ditch drop box for something like O365 (online SharePoint) or you could stand up an Owncloud in something like Digital Ocean.
But you mentioned movies - if you're talking several gig file movies.. that's not working to work well in any cloud solution.
-
@ntoxicator said:
Read/write capability was in regards to the drive being HFS+ file system. Even with SMB share option checked on mac mini. This allows for read/write capability from Windows hosts?
I thought would be able to write to the drive from Windows because being HFS+.. or is that ONLY if the HFS+ formatted drive was directly connected to a Windows/linux machine?
SMB is the protocol that Windows (or any client) sees. The file system underneath is invisible to the end machines. That's why most SMB shares are built on EXT4 or XFS today, neither Windows nor Mac can read those file systems but the SMB shares are only for Windows and Mac. SMB is the only interface that the end machines see.
This is NAS / file server.
When you do SAN (iSCSI, Fibre Channel, SAS, etc.) you connect a block device, not a network file system, and then the file system on the drive itself has to be mounted. So in that case, using HFS+ would present an issue. But it would present an issue anyway since HFS+ cannot be shared between machines.
-
@ntoxicator said:
Unsure about their Hybrid Raid (RAID-6) setup though.
It's just RAID 6 with a virtual container on top so that they can keep the rebuild size down.
-
@marcinozga said:
@ntoxicator said:
Gotcha.. Thats what I originally thought. As I use to use SAMBA as file share server years ago and was fine for my windows hosts.
So then could really do away with dropbox up-sync. Unless they decide to keep 1-user account for backup purpose. Otherwise, all shares could be accessed over the Site to Site VPN tunnels
Still not truely seeing a good DAS thunderbolt unit. The Drobo 5D is a good contender. Alot of bad reviews; but appears to be from folks using it with Windows system with USB3.0. reviews for device connected over thunderbolt appear to be positive.
Unsure about their Hybrid Raid (RAID-6) setup though.
Any storage connected with USB - doesn't matter which version - is just a disappointment, and it's not restricted to Drobo.
Use SSD caching and stop worrying about RAID levels (as long as it's not RAID 5).USB 3 can be very good. But if you have TB, use that.
-
@Dashrender said:
Why are you looking to share storage from a MAC mini? Why not just a plain jane NAS?
Because Mac. If the NAS doesn't have vfs_fruit, and are there any that do?, you get horrible problems on Macs. Macs have a known bug that Apple refuses to fix because it promotes using Mac desktops as servers which sells more Macs. To non-Mac uses we just laugh at it having performance problems. But Mac shops just pour money to Apple to reward them for breaking the Finder app with this bug. So Apple is actually incentivized to make the problem worse, rather than better.
