The licensing model was my last point — if the OP uses FPO just to create data resiliency they increase their cost (or curtail their access).
I was really asking if there was a real, technical positive for using FPO in this example, as I could only come up with equivalences and negatives. -- Stephen > On Nov 30, 2016, at 10:55 PM, Ken Hill <k...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > Hello Stephen, > > There are three licensing models for Spectrum Scale | GPFS: > > Server > FPO > Client > > I think the thing you might be missing is the associated cost per function. > > Regards, > > Ken Hill > Technical Sales Specialist | Software Defined Solution Sales > IBM Systems > Phone:1-540-207-7270 > E-mail: k...@us.ibm.com <mailto:k...@us.ibm.com> > <Mail Attachment.png> <http://www.ibm.com/us-en/> <Mail Attachment.png> > <http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/platformcomputing/products/lsf/> <Mail > Attachment.png> > <http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/platformcomputing/products/high-performance-services/index.html> > <Mail Attachment.png> > <http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/platformcomputing/products/symphony/index.html> > <Mail Attachment.png> <http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/storage/spectrum/> > <Mail Attachment.png> > <http://www-01.ibm.com/software/tivoli/csi/cloud-storage/> <Mail > Attachment.png> <http://www-01.ibm.com/software/tivoli/csi/backup-recovery/> > <Mail Attachment.png> > <http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/storage/tape/ltfs/index.html> <Mail > Attachment.png> <http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/storage/spectrum/> <Mail > Attachment.png> <http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/storage/spectrum/scale/> > <Mail Attachment.png> > <https://www.ibm.com/marketplace/cloud/object-storage/us/en-us> > > 2300 Dulles Station Blvd > Herndon, VA 20171-6133 > United States > > > > > > From: Stephen Ulmer <ul...@ulmer.org> > To: gpfsug main discussion list <gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org> > Date: 11/30/2016 09:46 PM > Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Strategies - servers with local SAS disks > Sent by: gpfsug-discuss-boun...@spectrumscale.org > > > > > I don’t understand what FPO provides here that mirroring doesn’t: > You can still use failure domains — one for each node. > Both still have redundancy for the data; you can lose a disk or a node. > The data has to be re-striped in the event of a disk failure — no matter what. > > Also, the FPO license doesn’t allow for regular clients to access the data -- > only server and FPO nodes. > > What am I missing? > > Liberty, > > -- > Stephen > > > > On Nov 30, 2016, at 3:51 PM, Andrew Beattie <abeat...@au1.ibm.com > <mailto:abeat...@au1.ibm.com>> wrote: > > Bob, > > If your not going to use integrated Raid controllers in the servers, then FPO > would seem to be the most resilient scenario. > yes it has its own overheads, but with that many drives to manage, a JOBD > architecture and manual restriping doesn't sound like fun > > If you are going down the path of integrated raid controllers then any form > of distributed raid is probably the best scenario, Raid 6 obviously. > > How many Nodes are you planning on building? The more nodes the more value > FPO is likely to bring as you can be more specific in how the data is written > to the nodes. > > Andrew Beattie > Software Defined Storage - IT Specialist > Phone: 614-2133-7927 > E-mail: abeat...@au1.ibm.com <mailto:abeat...@au1.ibm.com> > > > ----- Original message ----- > From: "Oesterlin, Robert" <robert.oester...@nuance.com > <mailto:robert.oester...@nuance.com>> > Sent by: gpfsug-discuss-boun...@spectrumscale.org > <mailto:gpfsug-discuss-boun...@spectrumscale.org> > To: gpfsug main discussion list <gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org > <mailto:gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org>> > Cc: > Subject: [gpfsug-discuss] Strategies - servers with local SAS disks > Date: Thu, Dec 1, 2016 12:34 AM > Looking for feedback/strategies in setting up several GPFS servers with local > SAS. They would all be part of the same file system. The systems are all > similar in configuration - 70 4TB drives. > > > Options I’m considering: > > > - Create RAID arrays of the disks on each server (worried about the RAID > rebuild time when a drive fails with 4, 6, 8TB drives) > > - No RAID with 2 replicas, single drive per NSD. When a drive fails, recreate > the NSD – but then I need to fix up the data replication via restripe > > - FPO – with multiple failure groups - letting the system manage replica > placement and then have GPFS due the restripe on disk failure automatically > > > Comments or other ideas welcome. > > > Bob Oesterlin > Sr Principal Storage Engineer, Nuance > 507-269-0413 > > > > _______________________________________________ > gpfsug-discuss mailing list > gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org <http://spectrumscale.org/> > http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss > <http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss> > > > _______________________________________________ > gpfsug-discuss mailing list > gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org <http://spectrumscale.org/> > http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss > <http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss> > _______________________________________________ > gpfsug-discuss mailing list > gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org > http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss > <http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss> > > > > _______________________________________________ > gpfsug-discuss mailing list > gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org > http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss >
_______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
