FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > CentOS > CentOS

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 12-11-2010, 03:15 PM
Rudi Ahlers
 
Default What NAS device(s) do you use? And why?

If you use any NAS (or a SAN) devices, what do you use? And I'm
referring more to larger scale network storage than your home PC or
home theater system.

We've had very good experiences with our NetGear ReadyNAS devices but
I'm in the market for something new. The NetGear's aren't the cheapest
ones around but they do what it says on the box. My only real gripe
with them is the lack of decent scalability.

TheCus devices seems to be rather powerful as well, and you can stack
upto 5 units together. But that's where the line stops.

I'm now looking for something that could scale beyond 100TB on one
device (not necessarily one unit though) and find it frustrating that
most NAS's come in 1U or 2U at most.

Maybe I'm just not shopping around enough, or maybe I prefer to well
known brands, I don't know.



So, what do you use?
How well does it work for you?
And, how reliable / fast / scalable is it?

--
Kind Regards
Rudi Ahlers
SoftDux

Website: http://www.SoftDux.com
Technical Blog: http://Blog.SoftDux.com
Office: 087 805 9573
Cell: 082 554 7532
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-11-2010, 03:31 PM
John R Pierce
 
Default What NAS device(s) do you use? And why?

On 12/11/10 8:15 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
> If you use any NAS (or a SAN) devices, what do you use? And I'm
> referring more to larger scale network storage than your home PC or
> home theater system.
>
> We've had very good experiences with our NetGear ReadyNAS devices but
> I'm in the market for something new. The NetGear's aren't the cheapest
> ones around but they do what it says on the box. My only real gripe
> with them is the lack of decent scalability.

see, I'd consider ReadyNAS to be SOHO, just what you said you didn't want.


> I'm now looking for something that could scale beyond 100TB on one
> device (not necessarily one unit though) and find it frustrating that
> most NAS's come in 1U or 2U at most.
>
> Maybe I'm just not shopping around enough, or maybe I prefer to well
> known brands, I don't know.

the big boys in NAS are Network Appliance aka Netapp. they will scale
as large as your budget allows. The FAS6200 line scales to something
like 1400 drives and redundant HA controllers.




_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-11-2010, 03:38 PM
Rudi Ahlers
 
Default What NAS device(s) do you use? And why?

On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 6:31 PM, John R Pierce <pierce@hogranch.com> wrote:
> On 12/11/10 8:15 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
>> If you use any NAS (or a SAN) devices, what do you use? And I'm
>> referring more to larger scale network storage than your home PC or
>> home theater system.
>>
>> We've had very good experiences with our NetGear ReadyNAS devices but
>> I'm in the market for something new. The NetGear's aren't the cheapest
>> ones around but they do what it says on the box. My only real gripe
>> with them is the lack of decent scalability.
>
> see, I'd consider ReadyNAS to be SOHO, just what you said you didn't want.
>
>
>> I'm now looking for something that could scale beyond 100TB on one
>> device (not necessarily one unit though) and find it frustrating that
>> most NAS's come in 1U or 2U at most.
>>
>> Maybe I'm just not shopping around enough, or maybe I prefer to well
>> known brands, I don't know.
>
> the big boys in NAS are Network Appliance aka Netapp. *they will scale
> as large as your budget allows. *The FAS6200 line scales to something
> like 1400 drives and redundant HA controllers.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________


Yes, I know. But the problem I have with NetApp is that it's not build
for a smaller market. i.e. a client looking to start small and scale
as he needs, and can afford to.

The NetGear's allow exactly just that. One can start small and grow as
needed. There's no need to over budget or over spend. Often a client
only needs about 5 to 12 TB storage, but with high availability. I
suppose the redundant PSU's do help a bit with that, and both TheCus
and ReadyNAS can be setup in high availability with 2 devices.




--
Kind Regards
Rudi Ahlers
SoftDux

Website: http://www.SoftDux.com
Technical Blog: http://Blog.SoftDux.com
Office: 087 805 9573
Cell: 082 554 7532
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-11-2010, 04:24 PM
Rainer Duffner
 
Default What NAS device(s) do you use? And why?

Am 11.12.2010 um 17:38 schrieb Rudi Ahlers:

>
> Yes, I know. But the problem I have with NetApp is that it's not build
> for a smaller market. i.e. a client looking to start small and scale
> as he needs, and can afford to.
>
> The NetGear's allow exactly just that. One can start small and grow as
> needed. There's no need to over budget or over spend. Often a client
> only needs about 5 to 12 TB storage, but with high availability. I
> suppose the redundant PSU's do help a bit with that, and both TheCus
> and ReadyNAS can be setup in high availability with 2 devices.
>



The other question is if it actually works.
Too many of the low-cost devices eat the data on the drives, when the
motherboard or the controller fries...
With luck, you can read the data on one of the drives...

If the client only needs 12TB, there's shurely a NetApp that is
cheaper but only scales to 10 or 20TB.
If the client has maxed that out and needs to go beyond that, he needs
to buy a bigger filer-head + shelves and migrate his data (AFAIK,
that's possible, at a charge...).

It would be a waste of money to have a filer-head that can scale to
100TB sit with only 12TB.
For 100TB, you need bigger filer-hardware.
Most people who say "we need to scale to 100TB" never reach it - it's
wishful thinking that their business will continue to grow like in the
1st year.

You might want to try to get a quote from Oracle for a Unified Storage
Appliance 7320 and compare it with one of NetApps entry-level offerings.

With 100TB, DIY is out of the question ;-)

BTW: what does the client do with the disk-space? What's the access-
pattern?



Rainer
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-11-2010, 04:29 PM
Rafa Grimán
 
Default What NAS device(s) do you use? And why?

Hi

On Saturday 11 December 2010 17:38 Rudi Ahlers wrote
> On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 6:31 PM, John R Pierce <pierce@hogranch.com> wrote:
> > On 12/11/10 8:15 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
> >> If you use any NAS (or a SAN) devices, what do you use? And I'm
> >> referring more to larger scale network storage than your home PC or
> >> home theater system.
> >>
> >> We've had very good experiences with our NetGear ReadyNAS devices but
> >> I'm in the market for something new. The NetGear's aren't the cheapest
> >> ones around but they do what it says on the box. My only real gripe
> >> with them is the lack of decent scalability.
> >
> > see, I'd consider ReadyNAS to be SOHO, just what you said you didn't
> > want.
> >
> >> I'm now looking for something that could scale beyond 100TB on one
> >> device (not necessarily one unit though) and find it frustrating that
> >> most NAS's come in 1U or 2U at most.
> >>
> >> Maybe I'm just not shopping around enough, or maybe I prefer to well
> >> known brands, I don't know.
> >
> > the big boys in NAS are Network Appliance aka Netapp. �they will scale
> > as large as your budget allows. �The FAS6200 line scales to something
> > like 1400 drives and redundant HA controllers.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
>
> Yes, I know. But the problem I have with NetApp is that it's not build
> for a smaller market. i.e. a client looking to start small and scale
> as he needs, and can afford to.


What about a DIY NAS with an off the shelf server and storage array?


> The NetGear's allow exactly just that. One can start small and grow as
> needed. There's no need to over budget or over spend. Often a client
> only needs about 5 to 12 TB storage, but with high availability. I
> suppose the redundant PSU's do help a bit with that, and both TheCus
> and ReadyNAS can be setup in high availability with 2 devices.


If you get your hands on COTS servers and storage arrays you can configure a
NAS server with very good performance. If you can use GFS/GPFS/CXFS and
configure a multi head NAS server you can sclae quite a lot. IBM sells this as
SONAS, SGI also sells something similar with CXFS and you can do it yourself
if you want it cheaper

Scaling storage is quite simple if you use LVM + XFS:
1.- you add a new array or enclosure with its drives
2.- creat your RAID (5, 6, whatever)
3.- add the new RAID to your LVM
4.- grow XFS

You might need a couple of FC switches, depending on the number of of storage
arrays, servers, and if you want HA.

I don't like appliances. Yeah, they're quite "easy/nice" to use, but it's a
non stop paying for everything and quite a lock-in solution. Just MHO, mind
you.

HTH

Rafa

--
"We cannot treat computers as Humans. Computers need love."

Happily using KDE 4.5.1
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-11-2010, 04:33 PM
John R Pierce
 
Default What NAS device(s) do you use? And why?

On 12/11/10 8:15 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
> Maybe I'm just not shopping around enough, or maybe I prefer to well
> known brands, I don't know.

oh, another. NexSAN ... this is more SAN block storage than NAS file
storage, but you can put a NFS server between your NAS clients and it
for NAS functionality.

the SATAbeast is like 48 SATA drives, for up to 84TB raw (typically
you'd want to reserve some hotspares and some level of raid striping,
say, 7 x 6-way raid5)

these don't have the same level of total redundancy as a NetApp Filer
has, but they are way cheaper.










_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-11-2010, 04:37 PM
John R Pierce
 
Default What NAS device(s) do you use? And why?

On 12/11/10 9:29 AM, Rafa Grimn wrote:
>
> What about a DIY NAS with an off the shelf server and storage array?

and how do you avoid single-point-of-failure? if that COTS goes down,
your storage is offline, and you've lost any writes in progress.

enterprise storage has fully redundant *everything*, a dual filer HA
NetApp box will not even blink if any subsystem fails. cached write
data is mirrored in both controllers so if one controller croaks, the
other can flush the buffers for it, and client storage connections
continue without a hiccup. yes, you pay for this.





_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-11-2010, 04:45 PM
Ryan Wagoner
 
Default What NAS device(s) do you use? And why?

On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Rudi Ahlers <Rudi@softdux.com> wrote:
> If you use any NAS (or a SAN) devices, what do you use? And I'm
> referring more to larger scale network storage than your home PC or
> home theater system.
>
> We've had very good experiences with our NetGear ReadyNAS devices but
> I'm in the market for something new. The NetGear's aren't the cheapest
> ones around but they do what it says on the box. My only real gripe
> with them is the lack of decent scalability.

I setup a Netgear ReadyNAS for a small office client and found the
performance to be lacking. I could only get 10-15MB/s on a gigabit
network.

> So, what do you use?
> How well does it work for you?
> And, how reliable / fast / scalable is it?

For my own NAS I use CentOS and mdadm across a few TB drives.
Performance gives me 30-40MB/s from Windows clients using Samba. Of
course this route means you need to roll your own HA solution.

If you want off the shelf performance, scalability, and reliability
expect to pay $15k plus. For the office I am using a Dell MD3200i
iSCSI SAN with redundant controllers and switches. I have a few ESXi
boxes connected. One guest is a Windows box with a lun mapped for file
sharing. Performance is decent, reliability is there, and it is easy
to expand by adding additional bricks.

Ryan
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-11-2010, 04:52 PM
Les Mikesell
 
Default What NAS device(s) do you use? And why?

On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Rudi Ahlers <Rudi@softdux.com> wrote:
> If you use any NAS (or a SAN) devices, what do you use? And I'm
> referring more to larger scale network storage than your home PC or
> home theater system.
>
> We've had very good experiences with our NetGear ReadyNAS devices but
> I'm in the market for something new. The NetGear's aren't the cheapest
> ones around but they do what it says on the box. My only real gripe
> with them is the lack of decent scalability.
>
> TheCus devices seems to be rather powerful as well, and you can stack
> upto 5 units together. But that's where the line stops.
>
> I'm now looking for something that could scale beyond 100TB on one
> device (not necessarily one unit though) and find it frustrating that
> most NAS's come in 1U or 2U at most.
>
> Maybe I'm just not shopping around enough, or maybe I prefer to well
> known brands, I don't know.
>
>
>
> So, what do you use?
> How well does it work for you?
> And, how reliable / fast / scalable is it?
>

NetApp is probably the first place to look. I don't have personal
experience with it, but others in my company like the IBM XIV. It
installs as a whole rack (with some extra requirements for weight and
cooling) but I think they have a 'pay for what you use' plan and can
fill the drives in as needed.

--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 12-11-2010, 05:14 PM
Rafa Grimn
 
Default What NAS device(s) do you use? And why?

On Saturday 11 December 2010 18:37 John R Pierce wrote
> On 12/11/10 9:29 AM, Rafa Grimn wrote:
> > What about a DIY NAS with an off the shelf server and storage array?
>
> and how do you avoid single-point-of-failure? if that COTS goes down,
> your storage is offline, and you've lost any writes in progress.
>
> enterprise storage has fully redundant *everything*, a dual filer HA
> NetApp box will not even blink if any subsystem fails. cached write
> data is mirrored in both controllers so if one controller croaks, the
> other can flush the buffers for it, and client storage connections
> continue without a hiccup. yes, you pay for this.


As I said a bit further down in my previous e-mail: you can use GPFS, CXFS,
GFS as its filesystem and have redundant hardware.

If you want to get a better idea, check out SONAS from IBM. It's basically
GPFS + Samba and redundant HW. You get HA, high performance, modularity and
flexibility. You can also check out:

http://www.redhat.com/magazine/006apr05/features/gfs/

If you don't want to shell out what IBM is going to charge you, you can DIY
(if you have the knowledge) or you can hire some Linux consultant that has a
good Linux knowledge.

HTH

Rafa

--
"We cannot treat computers as Humans. Computers need love."

Happily using KDE 4.5.1
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:04 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org