this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2025
17 points (90.5% liked)

Selfhosted

46676 readers
542 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I inherited a decommissioned Dell PowerEdge T610 from my work recently. I have it setup with Truenas and plan to have it be our new Jellyfin, file storage, and whatever else I can figure out. But I'm new to Raid setups and was hoping for advice before proceeding. After doing a little research I figured a Raid 5 configuration would be a fun experiment and could help with stability in the long run.

My question is, should I manage drives via the hardware controller? Or Truenas?

The server has a hardware raid controller and the drives have to be configured in the bios in order to be visible by an OS. Easy enough. I setup 4 drives in a Raid 5 configuration, boot to Truenas. I try to make a pool with the vdrive but then Truenas wants to configure it. If I chose anything other than Raid 0 it would cut into the storage even more. So I went back in, changed the 4 drives to Raid 0 in the bios, then setup the pool in Truenas using the 4 individual vdrives. But then I started to wonder if the two would be compatible in the long run?

Then in wondered, is Raid 5 even worth it? I have a single drive I currently use as a direct backup of our important photos, videos, etc. That one is not going in the array but will be copied over for easy access and kept as a backup. So with a direct backup of the important stuff do I really need to sacrifice space for mirroring and parity?

I'm curious what you all think.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3dcadmin@lemmy.relayeasy.com 1 points 19 hours ago

Hey welcome to the fun of multiple drives. If you have the drives available then truenas (which uses OpenZFS) is better IMHO than hardware raid as it is just more resilient and you can (most of the time) move zfs data/pools around easily. I'm guessing ye olde Dell has a Dell raid card, and whilst they are ok, zfs is way better nowadays. If you value your data then parity and mirroring make for way better usage of drive space if you are careful. I mean zfs easily can support losing a whole drive (or 2 if you wish) without losing data, and the rebuild speed is pretty much 10X faster than old dell raid cards IF a drive does fail. Truenas has some great features built in for backup etc. and a decent truenas setup is way more flexible than a lot of the cheaper pre-built nas boxes as well. Of course, your mileage might vary, but I wouldn't be without my truenas setup now. It also serves via shares to the android tv box for movies etc. I don't even bother with plex. Whilst you might keep a single drive as a backup of the backup that pretty much wouldn't be needed in zfs as the data is pretty damn secure with parity, but you might not agree. The other beauty of using zfs is that it is perfectly happy to use sata/sas/m.2 drives or whatever as long as they are accessed directly, though with an old dell raid card if it doesn't support it mode or pass through for the drives it doesn't work - zfs just needs simple access to the drive