On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 8:03 PM, Ivan Rodriguez <[email protected]> wrote: > We are using ZFS, with jbod, not in production yet exporting NFS to > cloudstack, I'm not really happy about the performance > but I think is related to the hardware itself rather than technology, we > are using intel SR2625UR and Intel 320 SSD, we were evaluating gluster as > well, but we decided to move away from that path since gluster nfs is still > performing poorly, plus we would like to see cloudstack integrating the > gluster-fuse module, we haven't decided the final storage setup but at the > moment we had better results with ZFS. > >
question is whos ZFS and have you "tweaked" the zfs / nfs config for performance > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Nik Martin <[email protected]>wrote: > >> On 10/22/2012 05:49 PM, Trevor Francis wrote: >> >>> ZFS looks really interesting to me and I am leaning that way. I am >>> considering using FreeNAS, as people seem to be having good luck with >>> it. Can anyone weigh in here? >>> >>> >> My personal opinion, I think FreeNAS and OpenFiler have horrible, horrible >> User Interfaces - not very intuitive, and they both seem to be file servers >> with things like iSCSI targets tacked on as an afterthought. >> >> Nik >> >> >>> Trevor Francis >>> Partner >>> 46 Labs | The PeerEdge Cloud >>> http://www.46labs.com <http://www.46labs.com/> | http://www.peeredge.net >>> <http://www.peeredge.net/> >>> 405-362-0046 - Voice | 405-410-4980 - Cell >>> trevorgfrancis - Skype >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> Solutions Provider for the Telecom Industry >>> >>> <http://www.twitter.com/**peeredge <http://www.twitter.com/peeredge>>< >>> http://www.twitter.**com/peeredge <http://www.twitter.com/peeredge>>< >>> http://www.**twitter.com/peeredge <http://www.twitter.com/peeredge>>< >>> http://**www.facebook.com/PeerEdge <http://www.facebook.com/PeerEdge>> >>> >>> On Oct 22, 2012, at 2:30 PM, Jason Davis wrote: >>> >>> ZFS would be an interesting setup as you can do the cache pools like you >>>> would do in CacheCade. The problem with ZFS or CacheCade+DRBD is that >>>> they >>>> really don't scale out well if you are looking for something with a >>>> unified >>>> name space. I'll say however that ZFS is a battle hardened FS with tons >>>> of >>>> shops using it. A lot of the whiz-bang SSD+SATA disk SAN things these >>>> smaller start up companies are hocking are just ZFS appliances. >>>> >>>> RBD looks interesting but I'm not sure if I would be willing to put >>>> production data on it, I'm not sure how performant it is IRL. From a >>>> purely technical perspective, it looks REALLY cool. >>>> >>>> I suppose anything is fast if you put SSDs in it :) GlusterFS is another >>>> option although historically small/random IO has not been it's strong >>>> point. >>>> >>>> If you are ok spending money on software and want a scale out block >>>> storage >>>> then you might want to consider HP LeftHand's VSA product. I am >>>> personally >>>> partial to NFS plays:) I went the exact opposite approach and settled on >>>> Isilon for our primary storage for our CS deployment. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Nik Martin <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:nik.martin@nfinausa.**com <[email protected]>>>wrote: >>>> >>>> On 10/22/2012 10:16 AM, Trevor Francis wrote: >>>>> >>>>> We are looking at building a Primary Storage solution for an >>>>>> enterprise/carrier class application. However, we want to build it >>>>>> using >>>>>> a FOSS solution and not a commercial solution. Do you have a >>>>>> recommendation on platform? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Trevor, >>>>> >>>>> I got EXCELLENT results builing a SAN from FOSS using: >>>>> OS: Centos >>>>> Hardware: 2X storage servers, with 12x2TB 3.5 SATA drives. LSI MegaRAID >>>>> with CacheCade Pro, with 240 GB Intel 520 SSDs configured to do SSD >>>>> caching >>>>> (alternately, look at FlashCache from Facebook) >>>>> intel 10GB dual port nics, one port for crossover, on port for up link >>>>> to >>>>> storage network >>>>> >>>>> DRBD for real time block replication to active-active >>>>> Pacemaker+corosync for HA Resource management >>>>> tgtd for iSCSI target >>>>> >>>>> If you want file backed storage, XFS is a very good filesystem on Linux >>>>> now. >>>>> >>>>> Pacemaker+Corosync can be difficult to grok at the beginning, but that >>>>> setup gave me a VERY high performance SAN. The downside is it is >>>>> entirely >>>>> managed by CLI, no UI whatsoever. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Trevor Francis >>>>>> Partner >>>>>> 46 Labs | The PeerEdge Cloud >>>>>> http://www.46labs.com <http://www.46labs.com/> | >>>>>> http://www.peeredge.net >>>>>> <http://www.peeredge.net/> >>>>>> >>>>>> 405-362-0046 - Voice | 405-410-4980 - Cell >>>>>> trevorgfrancis - Skype >>>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] >>>>>> > >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Solutions Provider for the Telecom Industry >>>>>> >>>>>> <http://www.twitter.com/****peeredge<http://www.twitter.com/**peeredge>< >>>>>> http://www.twitter.com/**peeredge <http://www.twitter.com/peeredge>>>< >>>>>> http://www.twitter.**com/**peeredge >>>>>> <http://www.twitter.com/**peeredge<http://www.twitter.com/peeredge> >>>>>> >>< >>>>>> http://www.**twitter.com/**peeredge <http://twitter.com/peeredge> < >>>>>> http://www.twitter.com/**peeredge <http://www.twitter.com/peeredge>>>< >>>>>> http://**www.facebook.com/**PeerEdge<http://www.facebook.com/PeerEdge>< >>>>>> http://www.facebook.com/**PeerEdge <http://www.facebook.com/PeerEdge> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
