Best Safe Node hardware

What a work of Art :rofl:

1 Like

Iā€™ve got a couple of 16TB drives so its even more right now.
Up to 512 TB

4 Likes

Making use of 448 TB on SAFE will need an epic internet connection.

3 Likes

I work out 100 Mbps connection would take 456 days to fill 448 TB :open_mouth:

edit: 1000 Mbps is becoming more available, but still a long time to fill at 46 days. http://gigabitmonitor.com/

7 Likes

Churning that would be fun eh? Doesnā€™t this show the need for ā€œniceā€ farmers to be allowed back in without requiring a complete flush and reload?

4 Likes

Starting to ponder a farming rig now that we are nearing vaults from home again.
I am thinking Pi clusters very much as described in this video.
I have a tendency to get excited and waste money on stuff so thoughts would be appreciated, what are your plans?

6 Likes

This is interesting. Maybe thatā€™s a solution that could choose newbies too. Not that hard to configure them :thinking:ā€¦

1 Like

I would say that until there is not friendly app pre-installed in OS it will be not that easy to make own vault/home server. OMV is one of the most popular which can suit for cheap SafeNetwork vault.

2 Likes

I believe the goal is that with any setup you will get enough rewards to get your money back for any setup you invest on.

if the network fails to deliver that then it will not be a success.

so I would say having the cheaper TB/$ disks with a setup where you have for e.g. x drives that are in raid with x drives with hot swaping, so when one drive dies you dont loose total capacity of available storage and you hot swap the dead drive.

so for starters I would say two drives in raid, and once the network needs more storage and you see that you are getting rewards for storage you already provide to the network then invest in one more set of drives. I believe problems have simple answers and ways of maximizing gains! its just a matter of putting effort to finding that simple answer.

so in a simple step by step way and a programmers logic I propose you this solution:

base rules:
rule #1: each drive has a drive in raid (when one drive dies you donā€™t loose total capacity)
rule #2 each drive should be the cheapest ratio of storage space to dollars (*1)
rule #3: you should have one setup for each stable internet connection you own/control (so lets say you have one home, one shop you own or control, one house for you summer vacations and you also got some relatives that depend on you for all the tech stuff)

(*1: just keep in mind the rules about buying storage: cheaper space per dollar but the quality or better the known years that a drive lives and in which percent its reliable is the most important when thinking about investing in a drive, buying a cheap drive that will die in 1 year and has high chance to die even earlier is not a good investment!)

game plan:
step #1: start with one set of drives (in each location you own/control the stable internet)
step #2:
condition a. see if the network rewards you and if it needs more storage
if condition a. is true then add one more set of drives (in all locations blah blah you know the drill!)
step #3: relax and from time to time go to step #2

how do you like that?

3 Likes

From what I saw when researching drives a few years ago.
The cheaper drives normally fail earlier, itā€™s a balancing act I guess if you want reasonably priced drives that last long enough.
Theres plenty of data available on drive length of life from data centres.

1 Like

Backblaze does a nice open source storage server

Cheapest rate is $0.043 / GB for a 240 TB system and total cost of $10,364 (see table near end of the article, would be different now being a 4 year old article)

At current MAID prices thatā€™s about 100K MAID.

This gives a PUT price of 0.00043 MAID per PUT (assuming 1 PUT = 1 MB)

Note that this doesnā€™t include ongoing costs such as electricity and bandwith and labor.

4 Likes

They are using 4TB drives, that is 240GB without any RAIDs or similar. Not sure why the title of the article says 480TB since the people who built it say 240TB

The option is there to have 3 to 4 times the ā€œ240GBā€ storage in the same size. If I am not mistaken some of the larger drives are less cost per GB, so the cost in future will be even lower. If the SSD technology keeps improving at this rate then expect less space requirements and similar costs for 240TB in the not too distant future.

But for the home user, how long would it take to fill the vaults built on it.

EDIT: I see later on in the artile they mention the larger drives but at the time of writing using them increased the cost per GB

1 Like

Would this be overkill?

That design looks like a lot like something that already exists and works well
= Gigabyte Brix Mini PC Barebone, to which you add RAM and SSD, optionally a 2.5" HDD. Iā€™ve got a couple i3 16GB and i7 64GB that work wondersā€¦ good luck to this kind of design from whereever it come but as consumer, why preorder something that exists?

At the moment there is no telling what is best balance for supporting SAFE networkā€¦ it might be that a bit more CPU or a bit more RAM or a bit more S/HDD or a bit more bandwidth, decides what is best. Naturally something well rounded will do well but no reason to stretch just yet until a few more test resolve what kind of node is most useful.

5 Likes

Gotta be worth a lookā€¦ All in 1 beautiful packageā€¦

Hopefully mine will arrive soonā€¦

Rup

3 Likes

I want to support them in their work, i like the ups built in to the design, i work in media storage everyday so want something well engineered to work with at home.

I could and have built systems in the past including multi machine storage clusters still in daily use 7 years later. Currently running many different systems with a vmware cluster in my man cave, but sometimes itā€™s just nice to have an easy lifeā€¦

Rup

1 Like

It will be used to provide for multiple tasks as well as Safe so itā€™s a good fit for me. I suspect only a small dark corner will be put aside to help support Safe, I want to do this as Iā€™ve followed Safeā€™s efforts for a longtime now, since long before the first near release however long ago that was now (??) and like to contribute to clever stuff when I can.

Rup

1 Like
1 Like

Yes - thereā€™s no reason to have a single point of failure in hardware suppliersā€¦ more variety the better. Also, the more variety of what is put to SAFE, likely will help its being robust. Everyone renting some droplet on AWS is not what this is about. Too big to fail, tend to do just that. Thatā€™s why I rather like the small factor mini computers that can focus on a task as excel at it.

3 Likes

Hi Phil,

Think I manged to cross wiresā€¦

I was describing using the kobol.io nas box as one way Iā€™m looking at running a vault. Not AWSā€¦

It may end up as a vm in my cluster, we will see.

Rup

rupert@btl.io

+44(0)7968191387

Skype:rupert.chandler