Starting to sound like Seagate/Xyratex there. :)
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 6:18 PM, Jason Hick <[email protected]> wrote: > For the same reason (storage expansions that follow funding needs), I want a > 4 or 5U embedded server/JBOD with GNR. That would allow us to simply plugin > the host interfaces (2-4 of them), configure an IP addr/host name and add it > as NSDs to an existing GPFS file system. > > As opposed to dealing with racks of storage and architectural details. > > Jason > >> On Jun 19, 2015, at 2:57 PM, Chris Hunter <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I'll 2nd Zach on this. The storage funding model vs the storage purchase >> model are a challenge. >> >> I should also mention often research grant funding can't be used to buy a >> storage "service" without additional penalties. So S3 or private storage >> cloud are not financially attractive. >> >> We used to have a "pay it forward" model where an investigator would buy ~10 >> drive batches, which sat on a shelf until we accumulated sufficient drives >> to fill a new enclosure. Interim, we would allocate storage from existing >> infrastructure to fulfill the order. >> >> A JBOD solution that allows incremental drive expansion is desirable. >> >> chris hunter >> yale hpc group >> >>> From: Zachary Giles <[email protected]> >>> To: gpfsug main discussion list <[email protected]> >>> Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Disabling individual Storage Pools by >>> themselves? How about GPFS Native Raid? >>> >>> OK, back on topic: >>> Honestly, I'm really glad you said that. I have that exact problem >>> also -- a researcher will be funded for xTB of space, and we are told >>> by the grants office that if something is purchased on a grant it >>> belongs to them and it should have a sticker put on it that says >>> "property of the govt' etc etc. >>> We decided to (as an institution) put the money forward to purchase a >>> large system ahead of time, and as grants come in, recover the cost >>> back into the system by paying off our internal "negative balance". In >>> this way we can get the benefit of a large storage system like >>> performance and purchasing price, but provision storage into quotas as >>> needed. We can even put stickers on a handful of drives in the GSS >>> tray if that makes them feel happy. >>> Could they request us to hand over their drives and take them out of >>> our system? Maybe. if the Grants Office made us do it, sure, I'd drain >>> some pools off and go hand them over.. but that will never happen >>> because it's more valuable to them in our cluster than sitting on >>> their table, and I'm not going to deliver the drives full of their >>> data. That's their responsibility. >>> >>> Is it working? Yeah, but, I'm not a grants admin nor an accountant, so >>> I'll let them figure that out, and they seem to be OK with this model. >>> And yes, it's not going to work for all institutions unless you can >>> put the money forward upfront, or do a group purchase at the end of a >>> year. >>> >>> So I 100% agree, GNR doesn't really fit the model of purchasing a few >>> drives at a time, and the grants things is still a problem. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> gpfsug-discuss mailing list >> gpfsug-discuss at gpfsug.org >> http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss > _______________________________________________ > gpfsug-discuss mailing list > gpfsug-discuss at gpfsug.org > http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss -- Zach Giles [email protected] _______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at gpfsug.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
