Hi, all,
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:45:25PM +, Michal wrote:
I am thinking a cheap solution but one that
has IO throughput, redundancy and is easy to manange and expand across
multiple nodes
Fast, reliable, cheap. Pick any two.
IMHO this is just as true today as it was twenty years ago.
On 25/03/2010 08:54, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
Hi, all,
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:45:25PM +, Michal wrote:
I am thinking a cheap solution but one that
has IO throughput, redundancy and is easy to manange and expand across
multiple nodes
Fast, reliable, cheap. Pick any two.
IMHO
On 03/25/10 00:45, Michal wrote:
backend storage for databases. It's all well and good having 1 ZFS
server, but it's fragile in the the sense of no redundancy, then we have
1 ZFS server and a 2nd with DRBD, but that's a waste of money...think 12
TB, and you need to pay for another 12TB box for
I wrote a really long e-mail but realised I could ask this question far
far easier, if it doesn't make sense, the original e-mail is bellow
Can I use ZFS to create a multinode storage area. Multiple HDD's in
Multiple servers to create one target of, for example, //officestorage
Allowing me to
On 24/03/2010 15:47, Michal wrote:
I wrote a really long e-mail but realised I could ask this question far
far easier, if it doesn't make sense, the original e-mail is bellow
Can I use ZFS to create a multinode storage area. Multiple HDD's in
Multiple servers to create one target of, for
Vincent Hoffman wrote:
On 24/03/2010 15:47, Michal wrote:
I wrote a really long e-mail but realised I could ask this question far
far easier, if it doesn't make sense, the original e-mail is bellow
Can I use ZFS to create a multinode storage area. Multiple HDD's in
Multiple servers to
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Michal mic...@ionic.co.uk wrote:
I wrote a really long e-mail but realised I could ask this question far
far easier, if it doesn't make sense, the original e-mail is bellow
Can I use ZFS to create a multinode storage area. Multiple HDD's in
Multiple servers
--On Wednesday, March 24, 2010 9:20 AM -0700 Freddie Cash
fjwc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Michal mic...@ionic.co.uk wrote:
I wrote a really long e-mail but realised I could ask this question far
far easier, if it doesn't make sense, the original e-mail is bellow
On 24/03/2010 16:20, Freddie Cash wrote:
Horribly, horribly, horribly complex. But, then, that's the Linux world.
:)
Yes I know, it's not very clean, but was trying to gather ideas and I
found that
Server 1: bunch of disks exported via iSCSI
Server 2: bunch of disks exported via iSCSI
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Michael Loftis mlof...@wgops.com wrote:
--On Wednesday, March 24, 2010 9:20 AM -0700 Freddie Cash
fjwc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Michal mic...@ionic.co.uk wrote:
I wrote a really long e-mail but realised I could ask this
--On Wednesday, March 24, 2010 5:12 PM + Michal mic...@ionic.co.uk
wrote:
If you were to do something like this, I'd make sure to have a fast
local ZIL (log) device on the head node. That would reduce latency
for writes, you might also do the same for reads. Then your bulk
storage
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Michal mic...@ionic.co.uk wrote:
This is pretty much what I have been looking for, I don't mind using a
SAN Controller server in which to deal with all of this in fact I
expected that, but I wanted to present the disks from a server full of
HDD's (which in
On 24/03/2010 17:14, Freddie Cash wrote:
Yes, that would be helpful (mirrored slogs, until we get slog removal
support).
As would an L2ARC (cache) device in the head node.
As well as lots and lots and lots of RAM.
And as fast of ethernet NICs as you can get between the head node and
Freddie Cash wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Michal mic...@ionic.co.uk wrote:
I wrote a really long e-mail but realised I could ask this question far
far easier, if it doesn't make sense, the original e-mail is bellow
Can I use ZFS to create a multinode storage area. Multiple HDD's in
Michal wrote:
On 24/03/2010 17:14, Freddie Cash wrote:
Yes, that would be helpful (mirrored slogs, until we get slog removal
support).
As would an L2ARC (cache) device in the head node.
As well as lots and lots and lots of RAM.
And as fast of ethernet NICs as you can get between the head
On 24/03/2010 22:19, Ivan Voras wrote:
For what it's worth - I think this is a good idea! iSCSI and ZFS make it
extraordinarily flexible to do this. You can have a RAIS - redundant
array of inexpensive servers :)
For example: each server box hosts 8-12 drives - use a hardware
controller
Quoth Michal mic...@ionic.co.uk:
I do aswell :D The thing is, I see it two ways; I worked for a a huge
online betting company, and we had the money for HP MSA's and big
expensive SAN's, then we have a lot of SMB's with no where near the
budget for that but the same problem with lots of data
On Mar 24, 2010, at 19:45, Michal wrote:
It's all well and good having 1 ZFS server, but it's fragile in the
the sense of no redundancy, then we have 1 ZFS server and a 2nd with
DRBD, but that's a waste of money...think 12 TB, and you need to pay
for another 12TB box for redundancy, and
18 matches
Mail list logo
