Thinking About A Server @ Home, Need Opinions

Tony

Tony

Staff member
No, not for the website but for personal use. Sometimes it would be nice to be out somewhere like at work or out to eat and pull up a picture or a file that is on my computer at the house. To this date, I have not been able to do that. I really don't trust Cloud servers yet nor do I want to pay for them. So that only leaves one thing, my own personal server.

Now the first thing to set straight is, I am not going to be buying a server rack and putting a dual quad setup in it with 32GB of ram and 100TB of HDD's. This is going to be a single computer (home) running the HDD's that I have (about 3TB's worth) and 8gb of ram. The computer I have that may be able to do it is an old Dell Dimension 8400. However, I do have other computers that I could use. With the Dell, I"m stuck with the P4 HT 3.0Ghz CPU, but with the other two, I can run a Core 2 Duo or the Q6600 Quad Core, same memory and HDD space.

The thing is, I know JACK about Linux. If I do this, I'm more than likely going to use Ubuntu Server to run it all. The reason I'm posting this is to see if any of you have used this software and how did it work for you? Where do I need to go to learn about Linux? I would like to get this setup pretty quickly since I needed it yesterday lol.

It would be nice for me to be able to design something, upload it to my server and have it ready when I get home to print or cut out. It's also nice to have a place to store everything that is not on my computer clogging it up.

Let me know what you have done to run this and learn about it.
 
murankar

murankar

Staff member
Since you are skeptical about cloud then try Ubuntuone. Five free gigs of secured cloud. I use it on my win 7, Ubunutu 12.04 installs and I have it on my cell phone. As far as a home server.

More than likely all you would need is a file server which is real light on resources, unless you go with windows as the OS. Any tower will do as long as you can install multiple hdd, not solid state (personally I am not a fan of solid state yet), a single network card (not wireless) and a basic graphics card. Oh and you will want to run a raid of some sort, like a 10 or 15, the second option is the most preferred.

If that seems like too much then check out no-IP.com. The will give you a URL that will map to your home computer. This will work as long as the PC/Lappy is turned on and connected to the network. With this service you can run just about any network service you want. I have ran a web server, remote desktop, vpn, and a mysql server 5. Since you a small amount stuff you want to achieve, I personally think this would be the most economical way to go. Your basic package is free and you can add features as you go.
 
Tony

Tony

Staff member
That reminds me, I would also like to run a mysql database with a live site on it that is local for testing. I hate using either my sites or my host server to test my questions lol.

As for SSD, get one, you will like it. Just make sure to put it on a mobo that can handle the faster speeds. Most new mobo's can, older ones can't.

When I said I don't like clouds, that means all clouds lol. I have a problem with putting my personal information in someone elses hands. Even here on this server that the site is on, I have NO personal info on here. Hell I hardly have any on my computer but it's more than I have on a server somewhere.

As for your prerequisites, I have plenty of gpu and HDD to suffice. I have an old 9800GTX+ GPU (way overkill, I know lol) and as stated about 3TB of HDD's. But more than likely that will be cut down in half because I was thinking the same thing you just posted, RAID 10.

I guess I just need to install this on one of my computers and see how it turns out. Test it before I do anything "real" with it.
 
murankar

murankar

Staff member
I just don't like the limited write cycles of the drive. Also in the case of a server you will want something more durable and less prone to failure. Yes SSD has its benefits and I unfortunately would not see the difference with what I do on the PC. Now for DB support, That would really need the most resources on the system. Nice thing is that a file server can be built on just-about any tower setup for very low cost. I have an AMD Duron 800mgh cpu and an nvidia 32bit graphics card at the house that would rock for this application. Good luck on this endeavor.

Also no-IP will work on a stand alone server also. No-ip provides a static IP for those people who do not have a static IP from the ISP.
 
Tony

Tony

Staff member
Here shortly I will have a static IP as well as interwebz that are twice as fast. But seeing as I'm on a 3 down system now, that's not saying much lmao. If I could move into town, I could get 20-40 down interwebz which is what I really need lol.

As for the SSD, the only thing I have on mine is the OS. My computer takes longer to POST than it does to load. I love the SSD, but the price per GB is just way too high to think about getting a second one. They will come down in about 5 years and I can assure you, I will have quite a few of them lol.

I will see what I can do with what I have on hand. I can build a badass server, or just a regular data server lol. I guess I need to decide if I want to keep my video files on them or keep them on whatever computer I'm using to edit them lmao. Oh that reminds me, I need to upgrade my local network as well. Oh the money is being thrown out the window these days lmao.
 
someguyinsandy

someguyinsandy

Crash Test Dummy
Tony

Tony

Staff member
As much as I would love to do that, I have just spent $500 on a new helicopter, $800 on a new laptop not to mention all of the "little" things that I have purchased so I'm in the dog house and banned from spending any more money lmao. That is why I'm looking at using one of the 3 desktops I have just sitting around as a server. I would like to build an Atom server since those have proven to work well on a server configuration, but even the <$300 server you posted would get me divorced and living under a bridge hahaha. But I do think you for the links and I will keep those handy for later. YOu know, when I'm out of the dog house and have just enough spending "slack" to hang myself? :lmao:
 
someguyinsandy

someguyinsandy

Crash Test Dummy
Ubuntu will work on just about any old PC you have, just make sure that you are not using vNidia for graphics, and you'll be fine!
 
Tony

Tony

Staff member
why not Nvidia? See that takes out two of the 3 computers I have lol. And the one that is using AMD is old as dirt lol.
 
someguyinsandy

someguyinsandy

Crash Test Dummy
Uh... nVidia :chargrined:

- - - Updated - - -

nVidia and Linux in general have a "love hate" relationship - mostly nVidia doesn't make drivers available to Linux users, and Linux users hate them for that...
 
Tony

Tony

Staff member
Ah I see. Yeah if there was no drivers, that would take my 8600, 9800GTX+ and my 560Ti out of the question lol. And I have no clue what the ATI or AMD or whatever this thing is, is... ATI, that sounds right lol. with a P4 3.0Ghz HT in a Dell Dimension 8400. Old as dirt, but just got it working again today because I got bored lmao. That one is the front runner for the server so far but I will have to put it in a bigger case to hold 4 more HDD's. Ugh the decisions lmao.
 
murankar

murankar

Staff member
I have had no issues with nvidia cards over the last 12 years of using Linux. Ubuntu does a great job of managing 3rd party drivers. In fact nvidia about 5 or 6 years ago released their drivers as open source. You can download Linux drivers right from nvidia.com. and if your talking Ubuntu for a server then I would use the server edition. Then install the gui.
 
Whirlybird

Whirlybird

Member
nVidia works just fine with my Linux HTPC . . . whether I was using Ubuntu or my present Commodore OS (souped up Mint 10) :)

- - - Updated - - -

Tony there are plenty of articles on line to learn Linux. A good book I picked up is "Unix and Linux" by Deborah & Eric Ray (Eric is a senior engineering manager in the Solaris organization at Sun Microsystems)

Notice the Linux Desktop "Cube" effect in the first two pictures . . . I have 5 different Desktops set up and can easily switch to them (guess the Cube is actually a "Pentube").
Linux is a very powerful OS based on Unix (as is MAC OS X) . . . and it's :hdbng: FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE ! :hdbng:

Screenshot-1.jpg

Screenshot-2.jpg

Screenshot-3.jpg
 
Last edited:
someguyinsandy

someguyinsandy

Crash Test Dummy
OK - Yes it is possible to get Nvidia boards to work in linux, but support is rocky at best. I probably should have qualified my previous statement, but I didn't want to get too far into the weeds. Here is a taste of what I was referring to:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nvidia‘s refusal to cooperate with the Linux platform is costing them way more than bad press; it is also costing them a lot of money. The Chinese government dropped their order of 10 million Nvidia GPUs because the drivers were incompatible with their system architecture. This could easily be solved if Nvidia would just release the source code, but as usual, they refused. The order went to AMD instead.

The Chinese were looking for 10 million GPUs for their pilot school PC project that will be running Linux. The problem was, although Nvidia’s GeForce / Quadro drivers were available for Linux x86 and x86_64, the Chinese needed it to work with MIPS. Since it will cost them millions of dollars to port the codebase, they needed the source code from Nvidia to make the drivers compatible with the system. Nvidia refused.

Between their source code and at least $250 million, Nvidia chose to keep their precious code. It’s like they’re not even a business anymore. I mean, come on, making your source code open source won’t do any harm.

Ask AMD, they just sold 10 million of their officially-based open source driver GPUs.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Please don't misunderstand, I am not trying to be argumentative. I just believe in telling people of potential pitfalls especially if they are based on my own experiences.

Tony, it wouldn't hurt to try your Nvidia boards - you may find that they work just fine. But, if you get to a place with a particular board where you are out of links to follow for workarounds and such, and the IRC rooms are of no help, then you are miles ahead to try a differant board rather than waste your time further!
 
Whirlybird

Whirlybird

Member
Definately there is a lot of bad press for Nvidia. They do have workable drivers for the Linux community, and like I said I have had no rocks, bumps, or issues with their propietary drivers . . . BUT . . . if you search out "Nvidia and Linux", you will find that they have been somewhat uncooperative with the Linux community . . . to the point of provoking an expletive and gesture from Linus Torvalds, the creator of Linux, in a video :yikes:


"Nvidia Jumps on Board with the Linux Foundation"

The above is from this link . . . Nvidia Jumps on Board with the Linux Foundation | PCWorld Business Center . . . it gives hope that their cooperation may be improving :)

As Linux is becoming more and more popular (I posted earlier about the Navy switching to Linux to control their drones), if they don't start making Linus and the Linux community happy, they will cut their own throats. :banghead:
 
Last edited:
Tony

Tony

Staff member
Here is the thing with ATI and Nvidia, they are like Intel and AMD. Nvidia cards are more powerful over ATI just like Intel CPU's are more powerful than AMD's clock for clock. This is why I have always went with intel/Nvidia over the years. I tried an ATI card and it just didn't work for me (back in my gaming days that is). Yes Nvidia and Intel cost more, but I believe you get more for your money too.

Okay back to the question at hand. I may give it a shot with my bigger systems but I will keep the Dell on stand by just in case something happens. I may start this next week sometime.
 
callsign4223

callsign4223

Staff member
Hey Tony, I know your anti-cloud because of privacy, and I totally get it and agree. This is how I got around it. You create a truecrypt volume and store that on the cloud server. Then you can decrypt it on your local computer and it doesn't matter that it's stored on the cloud, because they can't decrypt it. I prefer dropbox because it automatically syncs to a folder on my pc so I don't have to keep re-downloading the truecrypt volume. To my knowledge, no one yet has been able to crack a truecrypt volume. I know it's still on the cloud and they still have it on their servers, but as far as they are concerned it is just gibberish. If you wanna get real paranoid, you can create a nested truecrypt volume, then they won't even know that the second volume resides in the first one since the first one will create gibberish for the full size of the drive you create, regardless of how much space you use(I.E. you create a 2gb truecrypt volume, it only has 500 mb of stuff in it, the file will still be 2gb of gibberish.)
 
Tony

Tony

Staff member
Well the other issue I have with it is the cost of a cloud server. It's not like I'm storing a couch, I'm wanting to store 1's and 0's lol. That is the main reason I don't want to use a cloud. Well that and my internet is not that fast, but my local network is faster. I may look into clouds after a while, I just want to see if this will meet what I need. If I wanted to store files I could always do it on my server that this site is on. I have more than enough space and bandwidth to handle what I want to do.

Speaking of home networks Matt, when we were out at the field that day you had said something about raising some limit on the computer to make the network faster. What was it you were talking about? You can PM me if you need to. Right now, I'm only able to use about 25% of my 56mbps wireless and max 25% of my wired with a gigabit card. Let me know.
 
callsign4223

callsign4223

Staff member
I can't remember exactly. Why do you say your only using 25%? Remember, the numbers they are quoting are megabits per second not megabytes and download and transfers show in megabytes. You gotta divide the megabits by 8 to get the pipe size in megabytes. A 56mbps wifi connection is only 7 mBps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom