[besson3c]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

Yes, write holes can happen if the server fails in the middle of a write to the disk. That can happen regardless of whether you're running a software RAID or a hardware RAID; if the server hardware itself fails, you can suffer data loss. If the server loses power, it doesn't matter whether you're using a $5,000 RAID controller or a free software RAID in Linux - you're still going to risk losing data. I realize that a RAID controller can be slightly better than a software RAID in the event that the OS itself crashes, but the odds of that happening on a machine that's not doing anything but sitting there serving files is much much lower than the odds of the power going out (which happened today during a storm, and has happened three times on a particular outlet in our office).

Not quite true. A hardware RAID controller will include a battery to complete the last of the writes in the event of a power outage, but it is only good for the life of the battery. If your writes are severely backlogged and you have filled your buffers, you could still suffer data loss. ZFS solves this write hole in its design.

So yes, I listen to the people who have extensive experience in this area rather than listening to your endless ramblings.

What's with the attacks? How do you know what my experience is, and why is this in question? Facts are facts, I just pointed you to factual information about the write hole. If you were not aware that software RAID 5 is unsafe, you should be thanking me, not attacking me. You can Google about all sorts of problems people have had with corruption in their software RAID 5 setups over the years.

I'm not necessarily saying that your data will become corrupt, but I am saying that there is a risk involved.

[slugslugslug]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

It depends on your needs. Period.

Do you want a dedicated location for storing a large quantity of data? A server with some kind of RAID…

Do you want to be able to host websites from your home? A web server can be great…

Do you want to be able to have a private VPN…

Do you frequently find yourself sharing large files? Set up SFTP…

These are all good uses for setting up a computer in your house to use as a server in the generic sense. But how many of them gain from using Mac OS X Server specifically? I’m sure each of them is easier on OS X Server than the client version of OS X. But I doubt any are impossible on the latter. And probably only setting up a VPN in painfully difficult.

I’d say if you’re the kind of person who likes to tinker with software, including perhaps some arcane config files, setting up a Mac server without Server might be more fun. OTOH, if you have a need for the kind of stuff shif’s talking about but want to do it painlessly on Apple hardware, the new mini isn’t a terrible choice.