Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Xen: Users

24TB redundant storage

 

 

Xen users RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


admin.sa at gmail

Apr 9, 2012, 11:12 PM

Post #1 of 25 (1332 views)
Permalink
24TB redundant storage

Hello, Xen-Users.

We are looking for a HCL-supported storage appliance, capable of
realtime block replication between 2 nodes and active/passive HA with
failover to use it with XCP.
Planned VMs are AD, WSUS, Mail server (exim, mysql, dovecot),
Asterisk, ERP, File server and so on totaling with 700 users.

HP, Dell and NetApp look too expensive for our CEO.

Any ideas or comments?

Best regards,

Sergey Melnik

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


list at fajar

Apr 9, 2012, 11:23 PM

Post #2 of 25 (1318 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Sergey Melnik <admin.sa [at] gmail> wrote:
> Hello, Xen-Users.
>
> We are looking for a HCL-supported storage appliance, capable of
> realtime block replication between 2 nodes

Realtime replication is expensive. Make sure you REALLY need that, as
it can double (or more) the price of your storage system, AND reduce
your storage sync performance greatly.

> and active/passive HA with
> failover to use it with XCP.
> Planned VMs are AD, WSUS, Mail server (exim, mysql, dovecot),
> Asterisk, ERP, File server and so on totaling with 700 users.
>
> HP, Dell and NetApp look too expensive for our CEO.
>
> Any ideas or comments?

I'd start with:
- get oracle's quote for their unified storage appliance. Make sure
you get the one with SSDs. It should be cheaper than netapp.
- look into nexenta on whatever hardware they recommend (AFAIK
supermicro or dell/HP boxes should be good)

If both are still too expensive, the last path would be your own
home-brew solution using either openindiana or linux+drbd.

--
Fajar

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


admin.sa at gmail

Apr 10, 2012, 12:58 AM

Post #3 of 25 (1320 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Fajar A. Nugraha <list [at] fajar> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Sergey Melnik <admin.sa [at] gmail> wrote:
>> Hello, Xen-Users.
>>
>> We are looking for a HCL-supported storage appliance, capable of
>> realtime block replication between 2 nodes
>
> Realtime replication is expensive. Make sure you REALLY need that, as
> it can double (or more) the price of your storage system, AND reduce
> your storage sync performance greatly.
>
>> and active/passive HA with
>> failover to use it with XCP.
>> Planned VMs are AD, WSUS, Mail server (exim, mysql, dovecot),
>> Asterisk, ERP, File server and so on totaling with 700 users.
>>
>> HP, Dell and NetApp look too expensive for our CEO.
>>
>> Any ideas or comments?
>
> I'd start with:
> - get oracle's quote for their unified storage appliance. Make sure
> you get the one with SSDs. It should be cheaper than netapp.
> - look into nexenta on whatever hardware they recommend (AFAIK
> supermicro or dell/HP boxes should be good)
>
> If both are still too expensive, the last path would be your own
> home-brew solution using either openindiana or linux+drbd.
>
> --
> Fajar

Fajar, thanks for pointing out Oracle Appliance. Gonna have a look at that.
I'm testing Nexentastor now, yet it fails to start or detect on my test HW.

Walter, my question is about XCP, so it it only 2 storage nodes, XCP
itself has more nodes than that.
Also we have already tested Asterisk, works fine for several month now.

Thanks

Sergey.

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


admin at xenhive

Apr 10, 2012, 5:43 AM

Post #4 of 25 (1312 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

Contact Nexenta about this. Nexenta is based on OpenSolaris and ZFS, and it
offers really impressive performance. There are various HA options
available for Nexenta.
http://www.nexenta.com/corp/


-----Original Message-----
From: xen-users-bounces [at] lists
[mailto:xen-users-bounces [at] lists] On Behalf Of Sergey Melnik
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 1:13 AM
To: xen-users [at] lists
Subject: [Xen-users] 24TB redundant storage

Hello, Xen-Users.

We are looking for a HCL-supported storage appliance, capable of
realtime block replication between 2 nodes and active/passive HA with
failover to use it with XCP.
Planned VMs are AD, WSUS, Mail server (exim, mysql, dovecot),
Asterisk, ERP, File server and so on totaling with 700 users.

HP, Dell and NetApp look too expensive for our CEO.

Any ideas or comments?

Best regards,

Sergey Melnik

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users



_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


tknchris at gmail

Apr 10, 2012, 6:41 AM

Post #5 of 25 (1315 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

+1 for Nexenta, truly awesome stuff

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:43 AM, <admin [at] xenhive> wrote:

> Contact Nexenta about this. Nexenta is based on OpenSolaris and ZFS, and
> it
> offers really impressive performance. There are various HA options
> available for Nexenta.
> http://www.nexenta.com/corp/
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xen-users-bounces [at] lists
> [mailto:xen-users-bounces [at] lists] On Behalf Of Sergey Melnik
> Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 1:13 AM
> To: xen-users [at] lists
> Subject: [Xen-users] 24TB redundant storage
>
> Hello, Xen-Users.
>
> We are looking for a HCL-supported storage appliance, capable of
> realtime block replication between 2 nodes and active/passive HA with
> failover to use it with XCP.
> Planned VMs are AD, WSUS, Mail server (exim, mysql, dovecot),
> Asterisk, ERP, File server and so on totaling with 700 users.
>
> HP, Dell and NetApp look too expensive for our CEO.
>
> Any ideas or comments?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Sergey Melnik
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users [at] lists
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users [at] lists
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
>


outbackdingo at gmail

Apr 10, 2012, 7:24 AM

Post #6 of 25 (1314 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:41 AM, chris <tknchris [at] gmail> wrote:
> +1 for Nexenta, truly awesome stuff

Nexenta dollar for dollar compared to other products in the storage
industry is over priced
Do yourself and your company a favor and just buy a Nexsan E18 , tried
and true for storage
and a rock solid platform

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


fjwcash at gmail

Apr 10, 2012, 7:39 AM

Post #7 of 25 (1318 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 11:23 PM, Fajar A. Nugraha <list [at] fajar> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Sergey Melnik <admin.sa [at] gmail> wrote:
>> Hello, Xen-Users.
>>
>> We are looking for a HCL-supported storage appliance, capable of
>> realtime block replication between 2 nodes
>
> Realtime replication is expensive. Make sure you REALLY need that, as
> it can double (or more) the price of your storage system, AND reduce
> your storage sync performance greatly.

If the "appliance" part is flexible, then you can build your own setup
using either FreeBSD + ZFS + HAST or Linux + DRBD +
filesystem-of-choice. Both other realtime replication, HA fail-over,
and whatever NAS/SAN protocol you want to use ... for free. All you
pay for is the hardware.

--
Freddie Cash
fjwcash [at] gmail

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


admin.sa at gmail

Apr 10, 2012, 10:23 AM

Post #8 of 25 (1306 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

Thanks for all your answers!

Since this installation will be based on the remote site and we'll
have no access to physical location - we are trying to find a solution
which is simple to manage and pure bulletproof.
So no DIY appiances..

Nexenta with all plugins seens to cost a lot, yet less than HP/Dell solutuions.

Have not seen Nexsan E18 before, gonna check if is suits our needs and
avaliable in our country.

Cheers,

Sergey

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


fjwcash at gmail

Apr 10, 2012, 10:45 AM

Post #9 of 25 (1306 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Sergey Melnik <admin.sa [at] gmail> wrote:
> Thanks for all your answers!
>
> Since this installation will be based on the remote site and we'll
> have no access to physical location - we are trying to find a solution
> which is simple to manage and pure bulletproof.
> So no DIY appiances..
>
> Nexenta with all plugins seens to cost a lot, yet less than HP/Dell solutuions.
>
> Have not seen Nexsan E18 before, gonna check if is suits our needs and
> avaliable in our country.

There's also FreeNAS appliances from iXsystems, which use FreeBSD+ZFS
underneath, but with a pretty web GUI to manage everything. The
TruNAS boxes are basically drop-in, plug'n play boxes.

http://www.freenas.org
--
Freddie Cash
fjwcash [at] gmail

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


toddf at technetiuminc

Apr 10, 2012, 11:08 AM

Post #10 of 25 (1308 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

Freddie,

The simple answer here is to spend lots of money on a NetApp appliance
or two, or some other brand.
If you are going to be serving up vm's, speed is your friend. The
combination of network, cpu, bus speed all play a role in what you get
out of a san. Also if you go with a ZFS implementation, memory will have
a big impact as well.

Here is a little education for you on what exactly you can expect for
performance, from reasonably priced standard hardware.
http://www.zfsbuild.com/

-----Original Message-----
From: xen-users-bounces [at] lists
[mailto:xen-users-bounces [at] lists] On Behalf Of Freddie Cash
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 10:46 AM
To: Sergey Melnik
Cc: xen-users [at] lists
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] 24TB redundant storage

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Sergey Melnik <admin.sa [at] gmail>
wrote:
> Thanks for all your answers!
>
> Since this installation will be based on the remote site and we'll
> have no access to physical location - we are trying to find a solution

> which is simple to manage and pure bulletproof.
> So no DIY appiances..
>
> Nexenta with all plugins seens to cost a lot, yet less than HP/Dell
solutuions.
>
> Have not seen Nexsan E18 before, gonna check if is suits our needs and

> avaliable in our country.

There's also FreeNAS appliances from iXsystems, which use FreeBSD+ZFS
underneath, but with a pretty web GUI to manage everything. The TruNAS
boxes are basically drop-in, plug'n play boxes.

http://www.freenas.org
--
Freddie Cash
fjwcash [at] gmail

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


fjwcash at gmail

Apr 10, 2012, 11:15 AM

Post #11 of 25 (1306 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Todd H. Foster
<toddf [at] technetiuminc> wrote:
> The simple answer here is to spend lots of money on a NetApp appliance
> or two, or some other brand.
> If you are going to be serving up vm's, speed is your friend.  The
> combination of network, cpu, bus speed all play a role in what you get
> out of a san. Also if you go with a ZFS implementation, memory will have
> a big impact as well.
>
> Here is a little education for you on what exactly you can expect for
> performance, from reasonably priced standard hardware.
> http://www.zfsbuild.com/

Your data is quite out-of-date, considering it's based on an old
version of FreeNAS using ZFSv15, while the latest version of FreeNAS
has ZFSv28. The TruNAS boxes ship with the newer version of FreeNAS,
so performance will be quite different to what you have listed under
your benchmarks section. The TruNAS boxes are also appliances, with
hardware optimised to run FreeNAS to get the most out of ZFS.

It all depends on the OP's requirements. Nowhere in the original mail
was "absolute best performance possible" listed as a requirement.
Just "reliable", "HA failover", and "realtime replication". All
things that FreeNAS + HAST provide.

Not everyone needs to spend $100K on storage, everytime.

--
Freddie Cash
fjwcash [at] gmail

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


outbackdingo at gmail

Apr 10, 2012, 11:22 AM

Post #12 of 25 (1373 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Freddie Cash <fjwcash [at] gmail> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Todd H. Foster
> <toddf [at] technetiuminc> wrote:
>> The simple answer here is to spend lots of money on a NetApp appliance
>> or two, or some other brand.
>> If you are going to be serving up vm's, speed is your friend.  The
>> combination of network, cpu, bus speed all play a role in what you get
>> out of a san. Also if you go with a ZFS implementation, memory will have
>> a big impact as well.
>>
>> Here is a little education for you on what exactly you can expect for
>> performance, from reasonably priced standard hardware.
>> http://www.zfsbuild.com/
>
> Your data is quite out-of-date, considering it's based on an old
> version of FreeNAS using ZFSv15, while the latest version of FreeNAS
> has ZFSv28.


Uhmmm no..... FreeNAS 8.2.0 Beta is ZFS filesystem version 4
ZFS storage pool version 15


The TruNAS boxes ship with the newer version of FreeNAS,
> so performance will be quite different to what you have listed under
> your benchmarks section.  The TruNAS boxes are also appliances, with
> hardware optimised to run FreeNAS to get the most out of ZFS.
>
> It all depends on the OP's requirements.  Nowhere in the original mail
> was "absolute best performance possible" listed as a requirement.
> Just "reliable", "HA failover", and "realtime replication".  All
> things that FreeNAS + HAST provide.
>
> Not everyone needs to spend $100K on storage, everytime.
>
> --
> Freddie Cash
> fjwcash [at] gmail
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users [at] lists
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-users

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


G.Bakalarski at icm

Apr 10, 2012, 11:48 AM

Post #13 of 25 (1306 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:41 AM, chris <tknchris [at] gmail> wrote:
>> +1 for Nexenta, truly awesome stuff
>
> Nexenta dollar for dollar compared to other products in the storage
> industry is over priced
> Do yourself and your company a favor and just buy a Nexsan E18 , tried
> and true for storage
> and a rock solid platform
>
>
My vote is also for Nexsan E18. I have one and it is fast, solid - u can have
FC and iSCSI in one box and up to 54TB SATA (raw) or any mixed SAS/SATA set of
disk ... Extremally easy to use (just marvelous web interface) ....

If you are DELL bounded U may think about MD3x20 (x=[2,6]). With 24 1TB SATA
2.5'' or 12 2TB 3.5'' disks U can have 24TB raw (for same 20-25k USD) (NB for
some 30k USD U can have 54TB Nexsan E18)

Just 0.02$

GB


_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


admin at xenhive

Apr 10, 2012, 12:02 PM

Post #14 of 25 (1313 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

On the same hardware, Nexenta/OpenSolaris/OpenIndiana vastly outperforms
FreeNAS.
http://www.zfsbuild.com/2010/09/10/freenas-vs-opensolaris-zfs-benchmarks/


-----Original Message-----
From: xen-users-bounces [at] lists
[mailto:xen-users-bounces [at] lists] On Behalf Of Freddie Cash
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 12:46 PM
To: Sergey Melnik
Cc: xen-users [at] lists
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] 24TB redundant storage

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Sergey Melnik <admin.sa [at] gmail> wrote:
> Thanks for all your answers!
>
> Since this installation will be based on the remote site and we'll
> have no access to physical location - we are trying to find a solution
> which is simple to manage and pure bulletproof.
> So no DIY appiances..
>
> Nexenta with all plugins seens to cost a lot, yet less than HP/Dell
solutuions.
>
> Have not seen Nexsan E18 before, gonna check if is suits our needs and
> avaliable in our country.

There's also FreeNAS appliances from iXsystems, which use FreeBSD+ZFS
underneath, but with a pretty web GUI to manage everything. The
TruNAS boxes are basically drop-in, plug'n play boxes.

http://www.freenas.org
--
Freddie Cash
fjwcash [at] gmail

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users



_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


xenware at gmail

Apr 10, 2012, 12:05 PM

Post #15 of 25 (1356 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

Aprox price for Nexsan e18?



Dne 10. dubna 2012 20:48 <G.Bakalarski [at] icm> napsal(a):
>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:41 AM, chris <tknchris [at] gmail> wrote:
>>> +1 for Nexenta, truly awesome stuff
>>
>> Nexenta dollar for dollar compared to other products in the storage
>> industry is over priced
>> Do yourself and your company a favor and just buy a Nexsan E18 , tried
>> and true for storage
>> and a rock solid platform
>>
>>
> My vote is also for Nexsan E18. I have one and it is fast, solid  - u can have
> FC and iSCSI in one box and up to 54TB SATA (raw) or any mixed SAS/SATA set of
> disk ... Extremally easy to use (just marvelous web interface) ....
>
> If you are DELL bounded U may think about MD3x20 (x=[2,6]). With 24 1TB SATA
> 2.5'' or 12 2TB 3.5'' disks U can have 24TB raw (for same 20-25k USD) (NB for
> some 30k USD U can have 54TB Nexsan E18)
>
> Just 0.02$
>
> GB
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users [at] lists
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-users

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


outbackdingo at gmail

Apr 10, 2012, 12:22 PM

Post #16 of 25 (1295 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Peter Braun <xenware [at] gmail> wrote:
> Aprox price for Nexsan e18?
>

I can sell these all day long at 32K a unit, Im a Nexsan reseller so
if your interested
you can contact me.

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


toddf at technetiuminc

Apr 10, 2012, 12:27 PM

Post #17 of 25 (1307 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

That is the conclusion that I came up with. I now run 2 freenas boxes
and they are easy and cheap. Not so good for running VM's.
I am now in the process of setting up a Nexenta Community box on a PE
2950 with 32gb ram, 6 500BG HD's, and ssd's for the cache's.
What I'm hoping for is, over 100MB of throughput on the working set.
This coupled with XCP thin provisioning should give me sparkling
performance for 50+ VM's, I hope;-)

Creating a failover cluster of Nexenta/OpenSolaris/OpenIndiana is not
terribly difficult, but not for the faint of heart either, but if you
want to build a high performance SAN for less than 10 or 20K, this is
the way to go using Dell, HP, or IBM hardware.

One point that we have not touched on is the network. This can be just
as expensive as the SAN itself. For my setup using 4 port gig cards
bonded together, my storage network is worth about 2k. IF I went with
10Gb that would be closer to 10k, and I'm talking about used equipment!

-----Original Message-----
From: xen-users-bounces [at] lists
[mailto:xen-users-bounces [at] lists] On Behalf Of admin [at] xenhive
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 12:02 PM
To: xen-users [at] lists
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] 24TB redundant storage

On the same hardware, Nexenta/OpenSolaris/OpenIndiana vastly outperforms
FreeNAS.
http://www.zfsbuild.com/2010/09/10/freenas-vs-opensolaris-zfs-benchmarks
/


-----Original Message-----
From: xen-users-bounces [at] lists
[mailto:xen-users-bounces [at] lists] On Behalf Of Freddie Cash
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 12:46 PM
To: Sergey Melnik
Cc: xen-users [at] lists
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] 24TB redundant storage

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Sergey Melnik <admin.sa [at] gmail>
wrote:
> Thanks for all your answers!
>
> Since this installation will be based on the remote site and we'll
> have no access to physical location - we are trying to find a solution

> which is simple to manage and pure bulletproof.
> So no DIY appiances..
>
> Nexenta with all plugins seens to cost a lot, yet less than HP/Dell
solutuions.
>
> Have not seen Nexsan E18 before, gonna check if is suits our needs and

> avaliable in our country.

There's also FreeNAS appliances from iXsystems, which use FreeBSD+ZFS
underneath, but with a pretty web GUI to manage everything. The TruNAS
boxes are basically drop-in, plug'n play boxes.

http://www.freenas.org
--
Freddie Cash
fjwcash [at] gmail

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users



_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


lsc at prgmr

Apr 10, 2012, 12:33 PM

Post #18 of 25 (1297 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:24:29AM -0400, Outback Dingo wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:41 AM, chris <tknchris [at] gmail> wrote:
> > +1 for Nexenta, truly awesome stuff
>
> Nexenta dollar for dollar compared to other products in the storage
> industry is over priced

So, I really like ZFS, and I've been exploring my options; Nexenta
does seem very expensive for what I'm looking for (software to run
on my own hardware that I support myself. Obviously, if they provide
and maintain the hardware, that's rather a different value proposition,
but I'm far too cheap to pay for quality support.)

Is anyone using the NexentaOS or other free software on large
(50tb+) arrays? I've heard of a few people using freebsd, but
not at the scale (and utilization) I plan to have.


--
Luke S. Crawford
http://prgmr.com/xen/ - Hosting for the technically adept
http://nostarch.com/xen.htm - We don't assume you are stupid.

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


toddf at technetiuminc

Apr 10, 2012, 12:39 PM

Post #19 of 25 (1308 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

Look at it this way.

Buy Dell, HP, or IBM and get a service contract. IBM will even sell you
a contract on used equipment.
The software is really very easy and has tons of support on the
internet, but you could buy the support for that too.

Check out this thread and the forum in general.
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1573272

Nexenta forum
http://www.nexentastor.org/projects/site/boards


-----Original Message-----
From: xen-users-bounces [at] lists
[mailto:xen-users-bounces [at] lists] On Behalf Of Luke S. Crawford
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 12:33 PM
To: Outback Dingo
Cc: xen-users [at] lists
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] 24TB redundant storage

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:24:29AM -0400, Outback Dingo wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:41 AM, chris <tknchris [at] gmail> wrote:
> > +1 for Nexenta, truly awesome stuff
>
> Nexenta dollar for dollar compared to other products in the storage
> industry is over priced

So, I really like ZFS, and I've been exploring my options; Nexenta does
seem very expensive for what I'm looking for (software to run on my own
hardware that I support myself. Obviously, if they provide and maintain
the hardware, that's rather a different value proposition, but I'm far
too cheap to pay for quality support.)

Is anyone using the NexentaOS or other free software on large
(50tb+) arrays? I've heard of a few people using freebsd, but
not at the scale (and utilization) I plan to have.


--
Luke S. Crawford
http://prgmr.com/xen/ - Hosting for the technically adept
http://nostarch.com/xen.htm - We don't assume you are stupid.

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


outbackdingo at gmail

Apr 10, 2012, 12:42 PM

Post #20 of 25 (1296 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Todd H. Foster <toddf [at] technetiuminc> wrote:
> Look at it this way.
>
> Buy Dell, HP, or IBM and get a service contract.  IBM will even sell you
> a contract on used equipment.
> The software is really very easy and has tons of support on the
> internet, but you could buy the support for that too.

Because i can sell them a better system from a real storage vendor for
less then the dell / ibm hardware,
support contract and nexenta costs combined......... and still be
supported and bigger capacity


>
> Check out this thread and the forum in general.
> http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1573272
>
> Nexenta forum
> http://www.nexentastor.org/projects/site/boards
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xen-users-bounces [at] lists
> [mailto:xen-users-bounces [at] lists] On Behalf Of Luke S. Crawford
> Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 12:33 PM
> To: Outback Dingo
> Cc: xen-users [at] lists
> Subject: Re: [Xen-users] 24TB redundant storage
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:24:29AM -0400, Outback Dingo wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:41 AM, chris <tknchris [at] gmail> wrote:
>> > +1 for Nexenta, truly awesome stuff
>>
>> Nexenta dollar for dollar compared to other products in the storage
>> industry is over priced
>
> So, I really like ZFS, and I've been exploring my options;  Nexenta does
> seem very expensive for what I'm looking for (software to run on my own
> hardware that I support myself.  Obviously, if they provide and maintain
> the hardware, that's rather a different value proposition, but I'm far
> too cheap to pay for quality support.)
>
> Is anyone using the NexentaOS or other free software on large
> (50tb+) arrays?    I've heard of a few people using freebsd, but
> not at the scale (and utilization) I plan to have.
>
>
> --
> Luke S. Crawford
> http://prgmr.com/xen/         -   Hosting for the technically adept
> http://nostarch.com/xen.htm   -   We don't assume you are stupid.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users [at] lists
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-users

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


lsc at prgmr

Apr 10, 2012, 6:10 PM

Post #21 of 25 (1285 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:39:49PM -0700, Todd H. Foster wrote:
> Buy Dell, HP, or IBM and get a service contract. IBM will even sell you
> a contract on used equipment.
> The software is really very easy and has tons of support on the
> internet, but you could buy the support for that too.

Look at it this way. In my weeks spent talking to dell and HP support,
I not once encountered a person that I'd hire as an entry-level $15/hr
hardware tech. I mean, this is kinda my thing, so I wouldn't expect
a front line person to be particularly useful to me, but these people
actively stand in my way, and even once I get the client to escalate
me a few levels up, they still just don't have the values that a hardware
person needs. reseat failed raid drives? are you nuts? I mean,
even if there's a good chance the drive is okay; you don't test iffy
hardware in a production array.

I don't want (to pay for) support. I've got a big spare pool, and I can
get to it a hell of a lot faster than dell, IBM or HP. Unlike those
brands, I also am able and willing to diagnose an intermittent problem.
(God, I hate dealing with dell support. Sure, they are fine if it's an
obvious repeatable problem and you are okay waiting for them to get you the
part, but that's easy. They are worse than useless when it's a hard
(intermittent) problem. "what, it comes back after you rebooted it? fixed!")

Sorry if I sound a little hostile, but I have wasted /days/ (and many times
the value of the hardware in what my client was paying me) trying to get
dell to fix servers with support contracts. I mean, my client, first, paid
twice what I would for the server to get the support costs, then they
had to pay me to find the problem, then rather than being able to just
fix it, they had to pay me to talk dell into fixing it.

And this didn't happen once; over and over. Dell thinks it's acceptable
that sometimes servers "just reboot" - They tell you to re-seat drives
that have been kicked out of the raid. They complain when you send
back too many drives. They don't complain that you are sending back good
drives, no. they say that you are sending back too many drives.
I'm sending back so many drives because I just got here and before
I was hired, you told my client to re-seat drives that failed out of
the raid!

RMAing a part directly to seagate, cruicial, kingston, supermicro,
western digital, tyan, or any other board vendor I've used is way easier
than dealing with dell support. And you have a far better chance of
getting a good part back.

So yeah, spend a lot more money to make it so that instead of just
solving the problem, I have to convince someone else what the problem
is, then wait hours (or even days, depending on the contract) for them
to get the part, vs. just using my own spare pool that is right here,
and solving it directly?

I have had good (but very expensive) experiences with RHEL support; part
of that is I am just weaker on software than hardware, but I think part of
that is that when RHEL says you are talking to a top level person, you are
really talking to a top level person. My experience has been that this is
not the case with dell or HP. (my experience with netapp support have been
okay; I mean, I can still replace drives faster myself, but they haven't
stopped me from solving a problem. I have funny stories about EMC support;
they sent 3 greybeards that looked the part and tried really hard to solve
our mysterious network problem; eventually one of our fresh out of
school kids figured out the stupid simple and embarrassing to me
networking problem that was causing the fuss.)

Of course, the issue is moot; all that experience was from working for
clients with money. I don't have the kind of money required to buy those
support contracts.

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


list at fajar

Apr 10, 2012, 6:33 PM

Post #22 of 25 (1276 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Luke S. Crawford <lsc [at] prgmr> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:39:49PM -0700, Todd H. Foster wrote:
>> Buy Dell, HP, or IBM and get a service contract.  IBM will even sell you
>> a contract on used equipment.

> I don't want (to pay for) support.  I've got a big spare pool, and I can
> get to it a hell of a lot faster than dell, IBM or HP.  Unlike those
> brands, I also am able and willing to diagnose an intermittent problem.

> And this didn't happen once;  over and over. Dell thinks it's acceptable
> that sometimes servers "just reboot" - They tell you to re-seat drives
> that have been kicked out of the raid. They complain when you send
> back too many drives.

One thing that seems to work best for me, is to get a deal which includes:
- financing; you "lease" the server from a partner
- an SLA that says "maximum acceptable downtime"
- a contract that says "if you can't meet the service level, I'll cut
your payment"

Of course, it only works if you're "big enough" (from vendor's
perspective) that the hardware vendors (or their partners) are willing
to fight for your business :)

> I have had good (but very expensive) experiences with RHEL support;  part
> of that is I am just weaker on software than hardware, but I think part of
> that is that when RHEL says you are talking to a top level person, you are
> really talking to a top level person.

Correct. Getting to the "top level" (or at least the one in charge for
regional support) might take some time, but they really know what
they're talking about.

--
Fajar

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


toddf at technetiuminc

Apr 10, 2012, 7:02 PM

Post #23 of 25 (1285 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

Well, this is so true! In my situation, I am big enough to get good support, but as far as a san goes, I can put together something out of, say IBM hardware (with service contract) for less than 20k, have all the support that I need, and have the performance and storage of a 100k san. My IBM contract is 24/7 and 1 hour response time, and this means someone waiting at the door. IBM support is great!!! (when you are talking about enterprise products)

Now when we are talking about high performance hardware, you just can't get all of it a Fry's. (Fry's is 3 miles from my data center) So the next best thing is to go with name brand server quality equipment...

One way or another you are going to pay for this type of system, either with time or support contracts or both! What is down time worth? To me it's a lot.

-----Original Message-----
From: xen-users-bounces [at] lists [mailto:xen-users-bounces [at] lists] On Behalf Of Fajar A. Nugraha
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 6:34 PM
To: xen-users [at] lists
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] 24TB redundant storage

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Luke S. Crawford <lsc [at] prgmr> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:39:49PM -0700, Todd H. Foster wrote:
>> Buy Dell, HP, or IBM and get a service contract.  IBM will even sell
>> you a contract on used equipment.

> I don't want (to pay for) support.  I've got a big spare pool, and I
> can get to it a hell of a lot faster than dell, IBM or HP.  Unlike
> those brands, I also am able and willing to diagnose an intermittent problem.

> And this didn't happen once;  over and over. Dell thinks it's
> acceptable that sometimes servers "just reboot" - They tell you to re-seat drives
> that have been kicked out of the raid. They complain when you send
> back too many drives.

One thing that seems to work best for me, is to get a deal which includes:
- financing; you "lease" the server from a partner
- an SLA that says "maximum acceptable downtime"
- a contract that says "if you can't meet the service level, I'll cut your payment"

Of course, it only works if you're "big enough" (from vendor's
perspective) that the hardware vendors (or their partners) are willing to fight for your business :)

> I have had good (but very expensive) experiences with RHEL support;  
> part of that is I am just weaker on software than hardware, but I
> think part of that is that when RHEL says you are talking to a top
> level person, you are really talking to a top level person.

Correct. Getting to the "top level" (or at least the one in charge for regional support) might take some time, but they really know what they're talking about.

--
Fajar

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users


agwells0714 at gmail

Apr 10, 2012, 8:06 PM

Post #24 of 25 (1281 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

One word "GlusterFS." Its software, its HA its fast, and you can grow it (i
think live) and minimal configuration required.

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:02 PM, Todd H. Foster <toddf [at] technetiuminc>wrote:

> Well, this is so true! In my situation, I am big enough to get good
> support, but as far as a san goes, I can put together something out of, say
> IBM hardware (with service contract) for less than 20k, have all the
> support that I need, and have the performance and storage of a 100k san.
> My IBM contract is 24/7 and 1 hour response time, and this means someone
> waiting at the door. IBM support is great!!! (when you are talking about
> enterprise products)
>
> Now when we are talking about high performance hardware, you just can't
> get all of it a Fry's. (Fry's is 3 miles from my data center) So the next
> best thing is to go with name brand server quality equipment...
>
> One way or another you are going to pay for this type of system, either
> with time or support contracts or both! What is down time worth? To me
> it's a lot.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xen-users-bounces [at] lists [mailto:
> xen-users-bounces [at] lists] On Behalf Of Fajar A. Nugraha
> Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 6:34 PM
> To: xen-users [at] lists
> Subject: Re: [Xen-users] 24TB redundant storage
>
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Luke S. Crawford <lsc [at] prgmr> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:39:49PM -0700, Todd H. Foster wrote:
> >> Buy Dell, HP, or IBM and get a service contract. IBM will even sell
> >> you a contract on used equipment.
>
> > I don't want (to pay for) support. I've got a big spare pool, and I
> > can get to it a hell of a lot faster than dell, IBM or HP. Unlike
> > those brands, I also am able and willing to diagnose an intermittent
> problem.
>
> > And this didn't happen once; over and over. Dell thinks it's
> > acceptable that sometimes servers "just reboot" - They tell you to
> re-seat drives
> > that have been kicked out of the raid. They complain when you send
> > back too many drives.
>
> One thing that seems to work best for me, is to get a deal which includes:
> - financing; you "lease" the server from a partner
> - an SLA that says "maximum acceptable downtime"
> - a contract that says "if you can't meet the service level, I'll cut your
> payment"
>
> Of course, it only works if you're "big enough" (from vendor's
> perspective) that the hardware vendors (or their partners) are willing to
> fight for your business :)
>
> > I have had good (but very expensive) experiences with RHEL support;
> > part of that is I am just weaker on software than hardware, but I
> > think part of that is that when RHEL says you are talking to a top
> > level person, you are really talking to a top level person.
>
> Correct. Getting to the "top level" (or at least the one in charge for
> regional support) might take some time, but they really know what they're
> talking about.
>
> --
> Fajar
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users [at] lists
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users [at] lists
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
>


admin at xenhive

Apr 10, 2012, 9:45 PM

Post #25 of 25 (1286 views)
Permalink
Re: 24TB redundant storage [In reply to]

I tested Gluster a while back, and I loved the feature set but the
performance left me unimpressed. I was comparing a Gluster box with a
Nexenta/OpenSolaris box at the time. Even with a high end Adaptec RAID card
with SSD caching drives, Gluster still fell short. Gluster with the Adaptec
card was slower than Nexenta without any hardware RAID card. Gluster was
better than FreeNAS, though.



-----Original Message-----
From: xen-users-bounces [at] lists
[mailto:xen-users-bounces [at] lists] On Behalf Of Andrew Wells
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 10:07 PM
To: Todd H. Foster
Cc: xen-users [at] lists; Fajar A. Nugraha
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] 24TB redundant storage



One word "GlusterFS." Its software, its HA its fast, and you can grow it (i
think live) and minimal configuration required.

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:02 PM, Todd H. Foster <toddf [at] technetiuminc>
wrote:

Well, this is so true! In my situation, I am big enough to get good
support, but as far as a san goes, I can put together something out of, say
IBM hardware (with service contract) for less than 20k, have all the
support that I need, and have the performance and storage of a 100k san. My
IBM contract is 24/7 and 1 hour response time, and this means someone
waiting at the door. IBM support is great!!! (when you are talking about
enterprise products)

Now when we are talking about high performance hardware, you just can't get
all of it a Fry's. (Fry's is 3 miles from my data center) So the next best
thing is to go with name brand server quality equipment...

One way or another you are going to pay for this type of system, either with
time or support contracts or both! What is down time worth? To me it's a
lot.


-----Original Message-----
From: xen-users-bounces [at] lists
[mailto:xen-users-bounces [at] lists] On Behalf Of Fajar A. Nugraha
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 6:34 PM
To: xen-users [at] lists
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] 24TB redundant storage

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Luke S. Crawford <lsc [at] prgmr> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:39:49PM -0700, Todd H. Foster wrote:
>> Buy Dell, HP, or IBM and get a service contract. IBM will even sell
>> you a contract on used equipment.

> I don't want (to pay for) support. I've got a big spare pool, and I
> can get to it a hell of a lot faster than dell, IBM or HP. Unlike
> those brands, I also am able and willing to diagnose an intermittent
problem.

> And this didn't happen once; over and over. Dell thinks it's
> acceptable that sometimes servers "just reboot" - They tell you to
re-seat drives
> that have been kicked out of the raid. They complain when you send
> back too many drives.

One thing that seems to work best for me, is to get a deal which includes:
- financing; you "lease" the server from a partner
- an SLA that says "maximum acceptable downtime"
- a contract that says "if you can't meet the service level, I'll cut your
payment"

Of course, it only works if you're "big enough" (from vendor's
perspective) that the hardware vendors (or their partners) are willing to
fight for your business :)

> I have had good (but very expensive) experiences with RHEL support;
> part of that is I am just weaker on software than hardware, but I
> think part of that is that when RHEL says you are talking to a top
> level person, you are really talking to a top level person.

Correct. Getting to the "top level" (or at least the one in charge for
regional support) might take some time, but they really know what they're
talking about.

--
Fajar

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users [at] lists
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users

Xen users RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.