Jump to content
RESET Forums (homeservershow.com)

Home Failover


mleanz
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

 

I'm looking at creating a hyper v failover cluster at home with shared storage. I am not really sure as to what to purchase however. I would probably like a SAN with a 4 disk raid however would this have enough IOPS to run a small number of servers.

 

I was looking at purchasing the following equipment obviously also buying more RAM. I have a few CISCO switches at home from doing a CCNA so I will VLAN these up for the ISCSI.

 

Is it better to have a home SAN or buy a third machine and a raid controller?

 

 

 

Synology DS416j 4 Bay Desktop NAS Enclosure

Dell PowerEdge T20-3708 Xeon E3-1225V3 3.2 GHz 4GB RAM 1TB HDD Tower Server

 

 

Or somebody else may have a better idea as I am open to all suggestions. 

 

Regards,

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why Failover, that would be my first question. Failover Clusters work well, but when they go up the creek, they really go up the creek, that and there are other issues that are induced by them. I know this from experience. You will also not get too much use out of failover with 2 machines, it will work do not get me wrong, but experience has taught me that 3 is really the minimum to ensure good performance. If it's being done as a learning exercise then by all means, go for it.

 

Otherwise, I would recommend utilising dual servers with replication of what is important. Gives you more redundancy than a NAS will (it is still a single point of failure after all).

 

Storage has come way down in cost these days and as such by moving from a failover cluster for a couple of clients, to a replicated system, each server containing 20TB of storage space, 2x Boot SSD's, 2x Caching SSD's and the warranty being increased to 4 years from 3 to allow a slower rotation of devices, we are saving in excess of 50K. I bring this up as an example of why I am going to the replicated storage method

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really my scene in terms of experience, expertise or budget but ...

... this site might have a few alternative ideas for you.

tinkertry.com

These days I think its got to be NVME SSD's and 10GBE.

Two machines direct cabled without a 10GB switch might do the job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or maybe Thunderbolt v3 for a small peer-to-peer chain??

For a failover cluster, the storage needs to be shared it cannot be on either machine otherwise when that machine dies, the storage is gone. There are software defined options these days but again it's not really worth it at the home server level. To get true redundancy which is what I did for a couple of clients, you need 3+ Servers, SAN's and Dual switches so in retail terms about 80K of gear. The SAN's in this case, is real SAN not at NAS. Dual Redundant PSU's, Dual Controllers, the works (it's essentially 2 SAN's sharing one chassis and one bunch of disks)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Or somebody else may have a better idea as I am open to all suggestions."

 

I think I've got your answer Mark ...

... you need to go Hyper-converged:

 

https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/filecab/2016/10/14/kepler-47/

 

A couple of servers based on the new AMD Ryzen CPU's with Samsung NVME storage and Thunderbolt networking ... will be a killer home rig!

 

When you're done you could give me a Windows 10 guest VM and I cold remote in to have a look see ;-)

Edited by JackoUK
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...