Mailing-List: contact cloudstack-users-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <5085DA62.5080505@nfinausa.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 18:44:34 -0500
From: Nik Martin <nik.martin@nfinausa.com>
Organization: Nfina Technologies, Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686;
 rv:16.0) Gecko/20121011 Thunderbird/16.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Primary Storage
References: <E26CE9B2-784B-474F-B83A-D849E4EC5536@tgrahamcapital.com>
 <50856526.50004@nfinausa.com>
 <CAKBkivk9VcK5iAey6LSh5tS2m1UW4bWDcfzOjyS6Ob-hShS_SA@mail.gmail.com>
 <C25BA079-4220-4F44-821F-10117EE14D09@tgrahamcapital.com>
In-Reply-To: <C25BA079-4220-4F44-821F-10117EE14D09@tgrahamcapital.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 10/22/2012 05:49 PM, Trevor Francis wrote:
> ZFS looks really interesting to me and I am leaning that way. I am
> considering using FreeNAS, as people seem to be having good luck with
> it. Can anyone weigh in here?
>

My personal opinion, I think FreeNAS and OpenFiler have horrible, 
horrible User Interfaces - not very intuitive, and they both seem to be 
file servers with things like iSCSI targets tacked on as an afterthought.

Nik

>
> Trevor Francis
> Partner
> 46 Labs | The PeerEdge Cloud
> http://www.46labs.com <http://www.46labs.com/> | http://www.peeredge.net
> <http://www.peeredge.net/>
> 405-362-0046 - Voice  | 405-410-4980 - Cell
> trevorgfrancis - Skype
> trevor@46labs.com <mailto:trevor@46labs.com>
> Solutions Provider for the Telecom Industry
>
> <http://www.twitter.com/peeredge><http://www.twitter.com/peeredge><http://www.twitter.com/peeredge><http://www.facebook.com/PeerEdge>
>
> On Oct 22, 2012, at 2:30 PM, Jason Davis wrote:
>
>> ZFS would be an interesting setup as you can do the cache pools like you
>> would do in CacheCade. The problem with ZFS or CacheCade+DRBD is that they
>> really don't scale out well if you are looking for something with a
>> unified
>> name space. I'll say however that ZFS is a battle hardened FS with tons of
>> shops using it. A lot of the whiz-bang SSD+SATA disk SAN things these
>> smaller start up companies are hocking are just ZFS appliances.
>>
>> RBD looks interesting but I'm not sure if I would be willing to put
>> production data on it, I'm not sure how performant it is IRL. From a
>> purely technical perspective, it looks REALLY cool.
>>
>> I suppose anything is fast if you put SSDs in it :) GlusterFS is another
>> option although historically small/random IO has not been it's strong
>> point.
>>
>> If you are ok spending money on software and want a scale out block
>> storage
>> then you might want to consider HP LeftHand's VSA product. I am personally
>> partial to NFS plays:) I went the exact opposite approach and settled on
>> Isilon for our primary storage for our CS deployment.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Nik Martin <nik.martin@nfinausa.com
>> <mailto:nik.martin@nfinausa.com>>wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/22/2012 10:16 AM, Trevor Francis wrote:
>>>
>>>> We are looking at building a Primary Storage solution for an
>>>> enterprise/carrier class application. However, we want to build it using
>>>> a FOSS solution and not a commercial solution. Do you have a
>>>> recommendation on platform?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Trevor,
>>>
>>> I got EXCELLENT results builing a SAN from FOSS using:
>>> OS: Centos
>>> Hardware: 2X storage servers, with 12x2TB 3.5 SATA drives.  LSI MegaRAID
>>> with CacheCade Pro, with 240 GB Intel 520 SSDs configured to do SSD
>>> caching
>>> (alternately, look at FlashCache from Facebook)
>>> intel 10GB dual port nics, one port for crossover, on port for up link to
>>> storage network
>>>
>>> DRBD for real time block replication to active-active
>>> Pacemaker+corosync for HA Resource management
>>> tgtd for iSCSI target
>>>
>>> If you want file backed storage, XFS is a very good filesystem on Linux
>>> now.
>>>
>>> Pacemaker+Corosync can be difficult to grok at the beginning, but that
>>> setup gave me a VERY high performance SAN.  The downside is it is
>>> entirely
>>> managed by CLI, no UI whatsoever.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Trevor Francis
>>>> Partner
>>>> 46 Labs | The PeerEdge Cloud
>>>> http://www.46labs.com <http://www.46labs.com/> | http://www.peeredge.net
>>>> <http://www.peeredge.net/>
>>>>
>>>> 405-362-0046 - Voice  | 405-410-4980 - Cell
>>>> trevorgfrancis - Skype
>>>> trevor@46labs.com <mailto:trevor@46labs.com> <mailto:trevor@46labs.com>
>>>>
>>>> Solutions Provider for the Telecom Industry
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.twitter.com/**peeredge <http://www.twitter.com/peeredge>><
>>>> http://www.twitter.**com/peeredge <http://www.twitter.com/peeredge>><
>>>> http://www.**twitter.com/peeredge <http://www.twitter.com/peeredge>><
>>>> http://**www.facebook.com/PeerEdge <http://www.facebook.com/PeerEdge>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>