On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 3:42 PM, George Herbert<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 1:30 PM, William Allen
> Simpson<[email protected]> wrote:
>> David Gerard wrote:
>>> 2009/8/4 William Allen Simpson <[email protected]>:
>>>> If you have to buy now, and are unlikely to upgrade for years, the current
>>>> gold plated performance version is Sun ZFS over NetApp filers.
>>>
>>> Rilly? I thought they were comparable in performance but Sun was way
>>> cheaper (hence the patent kerfuffle).
>>>
>> No idea myself.  I'm just passing along comments verbatim.  I'm pretty sure
>> "gold plated" means expensive.  And I'm pretty sure NetApp wouldn't stay in
>> business long for "comparable" performance.  So, a whole bunch of somebodies
>> out there think that NetApp performance exceeds others.  YMMV.
>>
>> Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the team needs to decide whether the 2 server,
>> shared, pushme-pullyou variant, without Fiber Channel (or iSCSI or whatever),
>> would perform well enough to meet current needs.
>
> All the modern filesystems (WAFL, ZFS) have odd behavior and slowdowns
> as you approach full on the disk.  I've got a bunch of multi-TB pools
> on Sun X4500s serving NFS and local storage, with ZFS, and have seen
> consistent stable performance if we keep them less than 70-80% full.
>
> If you want more consistent behavior near the edges plus snapshots,
> you probably want to go buy Veritas / Symantec Foundation Suite - the
> Volume Manager gives you multi-disk RAID and snapshots, and the VxFS
> filesystem gives you growable and high-scale filesystems.
>

Another option for a shared file system with tiered storage (and
multiple-copy archive ability) is Sun SAM/QFS. It also has the nicety
of being open sourced recently.

Unfortunately, the open source version isn't ready for use. Also,
native Linux support has always been kind of poor; however, you could
always do SAM/QFS for tiered storage, and do pNFS (or NFSv4) for data
access.

V/r,

Ryan Lane

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to