Ideal way to set up MacPro as file server?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by dsa420, Sep 6, 2009.

  1. dsa420 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2007
    #1
    So I have a sprare 2008 8 core Mac Pro that I will be using as a home file server for a while until I move into my new office. It has about 6TB's of hdd space storing mainly back up data from my other machines (files, picutes, video, music, etc).

    In an effort to attain maximum transfer speed across my Airport Extreme base station, what is the best configuration? I was thinking I would employ an FTP client (filezilla) on all of my machines to allow for FTP transfer amongst all of them (all macs).

    Any other thoughts on how to allow for faster data transfer? What other functionality should I be considering?
     
  2. Matthew Yohe macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    #2
    Since they are all Macs, why not just AFP sharing?

    System Preferences > Sharing > File Sharing

    That would be very simple, and no need to mess with FTP stuff.
     
  3. UltraNEO* macrumors 601

    UltraNEO*

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2007
    Location:
    近畿日本
    #3
    Off topic...

    congrats, i have one too!! :)
     
  4. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #4
    how can you have a spare ~$4k machine lying around??

    OP: i would recommend gigabit cat6 ethernet cabling to transfer data, you get much higher speeds then cat5e.

    use AFP to allow clients to connect. share the hard disks from the MP and turn on file sharing, wala! its that easy.
     
  5. dsa420 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2007
    #5
    Is there an alternative to using finder to view the screen in "share screen" mode? I dont have an extra display presently so this has been my only means to control computer.
     
  6. dsa420 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2007
    #6
    Also, are there any settings I should play with to enable fastest possible transfer speeds within my home network?
     
  7. Transporteur macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #7
    Apple Remote Desktop.
    Great program if you want to manage a number of coumputers, but defnititely not worth the price for just one computer, particularly if it's a file server.
     
  8. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #8
    apple remote desktop has been suggested, its great! tad expensive but well worth it. you could use some free VNC programs as well, but they dont have the features such as "drag n drop", copy & paste etcetc.

    like i said, make sure all clients are connected via gigabit and that will ensure fastest physical connections. FTP will probably yield a tad more speed then AFP, but not a noticable amount (FTP is more ugly too).
     
  9. Matthew Yohe macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    #9
    vnc://computer-name.local
    vnc://192.168.0.1

    You can type those into Safari, or Finder's "Connect to Server" (from the Go menu), or even if you type out the url you want to connect to, select it, and then drag the text snippet to your desktop, it becomes a link.
     
  10. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #10
    AFAIK, on my computer, when i type in those into safari/connect to server it will open up the connection in the screen app.
     
  11. Matthew Yohe macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    #11
    Oh, that's what I intended... I guess I don't know what you wanted then.

    What did you want?
     
  12. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #12
    haha i didnt want anything, i was just making sure you knew what you were on about ;) :D
     
  13. JPamplin macrumors 6502

    JPamplin

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2009
    Location:
    Nashville, TN
    #13
    wha? Gigabit is gigabit - call me uninformed, but how are you going to get higher speeds out of Cat6 without a 10 gigabit switch and cards on both ends. And to my knowledge you need Cat7 for that.

    Please, details. I've used gigabit over cat5 and streamed 1080p video no problem, btw.

    JP
     
  14. Dr.Pants macrumors 65816

    Dr.Pants

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    #14
    Streaming compressed 1080p video isn't much of a problem. Uncompressed requires port teaming on gigabit ethernet.

    Check it, this may or may not be true. Higher signel-to-noise ratio is a good thing, IMO.
     
  15. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #15
    ok sorry, but your uninformed.

    if you have a gigabit switch/router (thats about as fast as cheap consumer models will get these days) cat5 can probably hit around 40MB/s total (320mb/s), cat5e will hit say 80MB/s (640mb/s) and cat6 will hit 120MB/s (960mb/s).

    these are actual throughput rates. the diffence is not only because of overhead data, but from other things such as inteference (cat6 has better cabling) and other things.

    well streaming 1080p video isnt really an indicator as it hits a max of 40mb/s (or a MAX of 5MB/s) where as gigabit can theoretically handle 125MB/s.

    no sure on the distances of cat6, i know cat5 can do around 100m. i was under the impression that cat6 couldnt go THAT much further then cat5.
     
  16. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #16
    Higher signal to noise is desirable.

    CAT6:
    • Unshielded: 100 m (330 ft) for 10/100/1000baseT & 37 m (120 ft) for 10GbaseT (250MHz)
    • Shielded (CAT6a): 100 m (330ft) for 10GbaseT (500MHz)

    CAT7:
    • Shielded: 100 m (330ft) for 10GbaseT (600MHz)
    • (CAT7a Draft): 100 m (330ft) for 1000GbaseT (1000MHz)
     
  17. Dr.Pants macrumors 65816

    Dr.Pants

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    #17
    I'll trust an engineer rather than the internet. ;) Removed offensive line from previous post.
     
  18. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #18
    The values I posted are spec, not what may actually have been obtained. It has carried for longer distances, it's just not a certainty, which is what the specification is meant to provide. :)
     
  19. UltraNEO* macrumors 601

    UltraNEO*

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2007
    Location:
    近畿日本
    #19
    Umm.. There's a fair few Mac's here.
    A couple of MacPro's, a few MacBooks, a few of PowerMac's plus a couple of old Macintoshes... most of them are just lying around, collecting dust and becoming home for small insects. :D
     
  20. twoodcc macrumors P6

    twoodcc

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Location:
    Right side of wrong
    #20
    why not sell a few?
     
  21. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #21
    where as i was talking more from a practical point of view :)

    i hope the offensive post wasnt aimed at me!

    WHUT!! noway!! hahaha maaannn im jealous

    i concur
     
  22. Dr.Pants macrumors 65816

    Dr.Pants

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    #22
    Nonono! Read on.

    I removed what I posted about the potential length of CAT6 - I said that it could go up to 700 FT, which is beyond specification. Sure, there are some exclusions to any specification, but I'd just have to eat my words depending on actual published material for how CAT6 was supposed to be used.

    Maybe I should have written, "my previous post"? ;)
     
  23. Tesselator macrumors 601

    Tesselator

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #23
    It was! It's all your fault too! We were all talking about you behind you back while you were reading in that other thread. Muahahahhaaaa....
     
  24. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #24
    ahhh im with you now! mybad - i had just woken up and saw "offensive post" and presumed it was something i had written that was ridiculously wrong and got scrutinized for it. ;)

    thanks for clarifying

    it generally is my fault. korea..nam.. WWIII...the reason why Q4 sucked... its all my fault :p
     
  25. Tesselator macrumors 601

    Tesselator

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #25
    Yup! All true! Well all but Q4... I'm still trying to figure that one out.

    See how you are?!? :D
     

Share This Page