I’m new to the whole storj ecosystem, and I’ve been reading a lot of posts for a few days now, and people are talking about adding nodes and more nodes and more nodes… And infinite hard drives.
If you live in a house where your bandwidth is 600/600 and you incorporate many nodes and many hard drives, it is understood that you are going to collapse the bandwidth, right? Therefore the benefit will not increase.
Can someone explain to me the euphoria of incorporating excessive nodes? It is clear that the end result is that people want to become millionaires.
I don’t know, I don’t get it. See if anyone can make an explanation.
You only need one email account now, and even before, many providers (including Gmail) treat + as a mailbox separator so you could use example+storj1@gmail.com and example+storj2@gmail.com etc., which all go to the same Gmail account.
Yes. If you have five spare hard drives, running a node per disk is advised. If the disks are of different sizes, RAID isn’t feasible. If the disks are the same size, you could RAID them and run one node but:
If you use a level with redundancy, you are wasting disk space to provide redundancy that the Tardigrade network already provides. This just reduces your income potential by needlessly dedicating at least one disk to redundancy.
If you use a level without redundancy, a single disk failure will destroy your whole node.
So yes, if you have five spare HDDs, why not run five nodes? I run four nodes at my home on different HDDs (all of which are mostly full already) and two nodes at my office.
Note that nodes in the same /24 subnet split ingress traffic – you don’t get 5x the traffic with five nodes, you get 1/5 of the potential traffic directed to each node. This applies to multiple nodes behind the same public IP as well as any Storj nodes your network-neighbors might be running.
This is a bad idea to start off with alot of nodes in the first place, Your creating more work for yourself to keep an eye on them, your creating more overhead costs of running the node + hardware. You aren’t benefiting at all from doing it.
If you see people running 20+ nodes there either cheating the system to show there nodes are all in different locations. Which it will catch up to them sooner or later when they cant keep an eye on them and they get DQed at some point in time,. Or they rented 20 different servers in datacenters that cost more then they will ever make back.
Yes, I’ve only set up one node, because I don’t know how this whole thing works, and I’m going to leave it at that for now. I’ve mounted it on an HP ML110 G9 server that I have at home, and used it for various things. I have a set of hard disks that are managed by an HP P440 4GB controller, and at the moment I have assigned 15 TB to storj and I am going to leave it like that to see how it works and what is the bandwidth consumption that it may cause once it is full, although everything depends on the input and output use of files that people are using.
Many posts talk about “I have five nodes”, “I have seven nodes”, and then I read people who understand the operation of this network were giving explanations of the benefits / no benefits of having so many nodes.
You are exactly right, the optimal is to have one really good node.
storj says this in some documents from earlier on.
It is true.
Some of us like to get a little more action/experience from what hardware we have and maybe get too involved…
The optimal situation is to have as many nodes as you have HDDs – unless you have dozens and then RAID5/6 would simplify management at the cost of some revenue.
Yes, I have the disks in a RAID 5, 8 × 10 TB (not SMR). This is the storage point for the whole server, as the operating system is installed in a RAID 1 of two SSD disks. In the case of incorporating another node, there is a colleague above that has said that it cannot be in the same network. In the future, how should I leave to incorporate another one?
It can be in the same network. Multiple nodes in the same public /24 subnet will simply share ingress traffic. Note that if one node is full and cannot receive uploads, the other node would receive all of the traffic instead.
But I can do all that under the same operating system without having any virtual machine? Because right now my identity is installed on a Windows Server 2016. And another thing, you can incorporate the other node’s storage in the same RAID 5, right?
But even if the other node is full, when a tarigrade client needs files and they are hosted on that node, it will work the same.
On Linux, yes. I have multiple systems that each run multiple nodes. Running a Linux Docker image on Linux does not require any sort of VM; the two instances are run in separate kernel containers.
On Windows the situation is different. You’d have to use Docker (which I believe uses Hyper-V when running Linux containers) or there are some people who have managed to create a second instance of the Windows service.
You could, but having two nodes that share the same underlying filesystem for storage is entirely pointless. Just increase the amount of storage allocated to the node instead of launching a second one.
Well, I’m not going to do any of that at the moment, because I just created the node a couple of days ago and everything is working fine. All I can do is expand the warehouse space I’ve assigned to this node. At the moment I have assigned 15 TB because I had enough space, in the future I can assign more if necessary. I have a bandwidth of 600/600, I don’t think storj will ever use that bandwidth. Thank you!
This is the right attitude. There are many factors that go into how profitable your node can be. The advise is always to start with as low an investment as possible. 0 would be optimal. That’s what I did, started my node on free space I already had on my NAS. I only started expanding the space when my STORJ profits could actually pay for the expansion. You’re not going to get rich, but you can make enough money to pay for the nodes own expansion and have a little extra as well.
However, apart from your connection and hardware, your location also has a big influence on how much you can make. It’s helpful to read the forums and see other users experiences, but it’s more important to actually see for yourself what your own earnings potential is.
Multiple nodes can be useful if you have several smaller HDD’s. You’ve probably also seen that usually potential SNOs get the advise to start only one at the time. The reason for this is the same as what I mentioned above. See what your earnings potential is before you go crazy. But since my node has filled up to almost 11TB before going down in storage used again, running 4x4TB nodes isn’t all that crazy. The number of nodes doesn’t really matter as they will share the same amount of traffic anyway. It’s all about what storage space is reasonable to share. I think your 15TB is right in the sweet spot and should probably be fine for the upcoming year.
Do get rid of that RAID5 though, it makes me itch every time I read it.
In general, I’m going to see how the node behaves as I’ve configured it now, and as I still have a little more space available, if I see it filling up very quickly, I’ll be able to expand it. I don’t know if here in Valencia (Spain) it will be optimal to have the node because of what you say about the location, but well, that is to wait with time to see what happens.
As for RAID 5, I can’t do anything right now, because I think this server (although the card supports RAID 6) can’t run a RAID 6 as I was informed in the official HPE forum. Although I don’t understand it.