On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 07:53:12PM -0800, Derek Simkowiak wrote:
> So, what do you suggest if your client needs a big system that can  
> survive more than one disk failing?

RAID10.

> And, if your client needs a really big server ( > 30TB ), what do you 
> tell them?  Do you tell them "you must double your hardware budget in 
> order to afford an 8U RAID10 system, as I refuse to build a single-case 
> 4U RAID6 system"?

Probably more than double, and not because the really big server is, well,
really that much bigger. I'd want to have a long talk with them about the
availability requirements of the data. If this is your home 12-tuner MythTV
behemoth, then you have nothing to worry about. If it's a file server or
database server serving a few hundred users, you would run out of disk speed
long before you'd run out of disk space. Such a huge dataset on such slow
disks won't back up overnight. SANs solve this by doing copy-on-write, but
it won't restore overnight either. Try a couple days. Would that work for
them? Are they OK being billed my consulting rates while I sleep there while
it restores?

No, more likely if that were really their requirements, they'd need their
data regularly replicated to a standby server. Maybe on site, maybe off
site. You don't fsck a server that big. It's totally out of the question.
You fail over to something else and mess with it outside of production.

If a client isn't willing to be realistic about what it costs to do it right,
*I do not want them as a client*.

> > ...if you're willing to live with 2TB of space.
>
>    I don't understand the argument: "Live with ~half the space and hope  
> two disks don't fail, because, well, baarf!".

Once you have a failure, you'll understand perfectly. In the meantime, I can
only say, "I told you so."

>    I've seen a couple of >600M/sec RAID6 systems, so RAID6 can be Fast  
> Enough for many applications.

If you're doing mostly sequential reads/writes, sure. RAID5/RAID6 come with a
fairly large random write performance penalty. This is partially, but not
entirely mitigated by controller write caching and battery backup units.

>    If you need resilience and space more than performance, what beats  
> RAID6?

Again, RAID10. Resilience and performance go hand-in-hand. There's some more
exotic combinations such as RAID61, but I don't think we're discussing
anything huge enough to make that appropriate.
-- 
Robert Woodcock - [email protected]
"Reasonable people adapt themselves to the world. Unreasonable people
attempt to adapt the world to themselves. All progress, therefore, depends
on unreasonable people."
        -- George Bernard Shaw

Reply via email to