Thank you lol 
Take pictures when you assemble it and share. Thats what Iāve been waiting for xD
2 Likes
*update
installing cpu cooler wish me luck
will take a while. worried i make mistake. maybe pic tomorrow 
1 Like
Thatās for preventing wires from getting tangled in the fan, not fingers.
The CPU area is visibly no issue. Itās all about the HDD cage, and whether you prefer to pull air from the drives or push air to them.
1 Like
IDK, my extra computer fans turn into random hobby fans and I keep a baggie of some spare grills in my box of cooling supplies xD
They have saved my fingers.
It trades depth for height.
It is not really meant for rackmounting as @etorix mentioned.
It is for people like me who have no rack. I. can shove it somewhere and be happy
I have alot of homelab gear and donāt have a real rack. Thereās plenty of value in just using home depot storage shelves.
2 Likes
@mooglestiltzkin I renamed the thread,I figured it needed that preface. Is that okay?
1 Like
What a tease 
(blah blah)
1 Like
i followed instructions. youtube said spread it out, but noctua said 5 dots is sufficient (and that if u put too much it negatively impacts). so i went with noctuaās advice.
i checked the fan is in the correct direction.
the height fits. no issue there but itās cutting it close.
was checking if there was any thin plastic film on the cooler, there was none. only the single big noticeable plastic cover
1 Like
mobo booted up but not updatedā¦ doing that now. i did follow all the instructionsā¦ at least i did not brick my mobo
i also tried testing install truenas, but it goes to grub recoveryā¦ have to google why it doesnt boot to truenas properly for the setup 
*update
-
updated bios
-
configured bios (fans i set to smart. see how good that works. so far so good)
-
truenas usb installer didnt work. but i think i know what to do. testing (DD)
*update
as i suspected. for rufus use DD mode. the other doesnt work, no idea why.
The other thing is to disable secure boot. Apparently truenas does not support secure boot for some reason. Did a google, there was discussion about possible support in 2025? no idea.
successfully installed and using truenas
Now itās just a matter of adding the other hdds, and doing the normal setup, nothing much interesting.
Only thing i can add later is the temps after some extended use. But so far so good.
cpu temps
average: 34c -45c
max: 60c
250gb m.2 nvme gen4 (truenas boot drive)
40c steady
dac cable seems to be broke. will probably just order a fiber optic transceiver. I want to test first if that works, before i order the same. using the 2.5gbe nic for now.
as far as cooling goes, i donāt have to do anything more. cpu, ssd, and hard drives all seem to be fine.
Troubleshooting:
When i reset truenas, your choices are root or truenas_admin
Why truenas_admin. Why not just admin?
Reddit - Dive into anything
Anyway i think thats a wrap. Any questions let me know 
tldr for this entire thread, if ur a newb and know the bare minimum about tech, but want to build your own diy truenas. you can, i did (this was my first time building a NAS)ā¦ and i also listed the entire process of how i went about it.
What you can do better is probably is the part selection (u can get something cheaper that gets the job done just as well). I just went with what i felt worked for me and within my budget. Do your own research, and ask for advise 
1 Like
Big milestone for me.
Managed to finally get rsync task to work (you need 2x truenas servers)
I used the ssh auto pairing and this did the trick. Though i had to randomly check both nas until it finally worked 
(becauz it complaint needing user with home directory, and another was a ssl issue)
so on the new nas i setup a task to PULL. meaning it takes from old nas and dumps onto new nas. tested on one share and it worked.
Gonna do for the rest
so can say good bye to hbs on qnap, no longer need it 
only downside is i donāt have an eta or progression of how much it transferred. i only know how fast itās transferring
This is how fast itās transferring
ssd and hdd temps about 40c so all good.
Those network graphs show Mbps, not MB. Is the graph incorrect?
1 Like
Why not replication?
2 Likes
donno how to use it. not sure what it is or how its better than rsync.
i started on zfs not that long ago
Learn
Then re-run your transfer using a replication rather than an rsync
(Unfortunately I havenāt made my video on it yet ;))
iām going as fast as i can captain
For the past few years Iāve worked on large file systems and billion file problems. While multi-threaded rsync can give the illusion of more/faster progress, itās not scalable long term. Thereās a reason why enterprise storage vendors either use solely snapshots or filesystem change logs for replication.
Yes, an initial large zfs send does suck, but the alternative is doing expensive file system traversals with tools like rsync where you expend an inordinate amount of time rescanning trees and re-replicating data. Iāve found that even if you have smaller quantity of files which are large in size, itās often faster to just re-replicate the entirety of the large file than to do the delta block checksum verification. What should be called into question is the structuring of datasets. No storage vendor can deal with āone big filesystemā efficiently. Datasets need to be split up based on logical structuring.
The only reason I use multi-threaded/process rsync is due to IT staff not being familiar with ZFS.
I would agree with this except zfs replication is dependent on . . .zfs. Our primary storage is not our zfs host but an Isilon cluster.
Rsync is invaluable because its ubiquitious, available/compatible with everything, not to mention reliable. Outside of paid software like atempo (which charges you by how much data you migrate), or gridftp, rsync is probably the easiest to deal with. Its also pertinent to mention the use case here, Iām migrating a subset of data. . .maybe a few hundred TBās between storage systems, Iām not using rsync to keep a synchronized copy between the Isilon and zfs host. Once the initial copy is done, there is no need for regular rsyncs. The data will reside on the zfs host and be replicated to another zfs host. Its the initial zfs replication between zfs hosts that is painfully slow. As I mention in my initial post, 15TB takes 19hours via zfs replication vs 5 and 1/2 hours via rsync, thatās not an illusion, rsync is nearly 4x faster for my particular dataset
https://www.reddit.com/r/zfs/comments/q3gmh0/zfs_replication_vs_multithreaded_rsync/
anyway iād have to setup some test datasets to test trial how it works, before i can commit to it. the thing iām concerned is, can a none zfs system access the data from the snapshots? if main nas goes down, then the backup is in snapshot, can it recover the full file from that? iāve only ever dealt with full files and rsync.
and also backing up to other external storage that donāt have zfs on them, and only support rsync
2 Likes
i had rsync compression on, should that be disabled?
That GUI makes 0 sense to me; 153Mibs should be about 1283mbpsā¦not 266mbps.
Either rsync is the most possible effective way of transferring data Iāve ever just now seen or something in the GUI aināt syncing with what I understand about data transfer.
Never used rsync & am guessing you didnāt do anything wrong. The GUI just looks to be presenting incorrect data unless Iām really misunderstanding somethingā¦