[lug] Favorite NAS

[D. Stimits]

Rob Riggs wrote:
> 
> Reiserfs (for the time being) is incompatible with NFS. That is being

Sounds like a question I recently had could help. The AFS filesystem can
handle networking and large files.

> worked on, however. But it sounds like it is a rather big undertaking
> to get it done right, requiring mods to the kernel filesystem interface.
> There is a bit about it in this week's LWN, IIRC.
> 
> We don't put big demands on the Snap Servers, so I can't attest to
> their performance under pressure.
> 
> Ferdinand Schmid wrote:
> >
> > How about Reiserfs?  I wonder about the performance of those snap servers.
> > Can they get close to a decent SCSI system with multiple user access?  I
> > haven't tested those little wonder boxes yet.
> >
> > My current file server has a little over .25Tb and it shows 100+ files
> > accessed at any given time.  The performance has been rock solid over the
> > past 2.5 years.  No downtime at all (except to grow disk space and for
> > system upgrades).  All of my clients are Windows (95, 98, NT, 2000).  The
> > cost was very low - but we don't have hardware RAID for drive redundancy.
> > All the disks are 10 kRPM ULTRA-LVD (80 and 160 MB/s).  Restores from the
> > DAT library are very quick, thanks to QFA (quick file access).

FYI, I'm a big fan of ultra 160 with 10k rpm or faster...it is
unbelievable how fast it is, and the drives themselves are not that much
higher in price than 80 MB/sec. Based on current market, the 160's are
probably going to be the same price as 80's not to far down the road.

> >
> > Ferdinand
> >
> > Rob Riggs wrote:
> >
> > > My favorite costs lots more than $15K for .5Tb. NetApps ain't cheap.
> > >
> > > For something in that price range, look at the Quantuum Snap Servers.
> > > They do NFS and CIFS using IDE drives in multiple possible RAID
> > > configurations (and JBOD). You can definitely get the capacity you need
> > > within your price range, though it will span multiple units. I think
> > > 240MB is their single largest unit still. We've got a couple in light
> > > duty use.
> > >
> > > http://www.snapserver.com/
> > >
> > > You are going quite cheap with a budget of 15K.
> > >
> > > I hate to say it, but I would stay away from Linux solutions (at least
> > > 32-bit Linux solutions) for this sort of thing. The 2GB file size limit
> > > is a killer these days. It has bitten me a number of times recently. And
> > > you really need fast recovery when the thing crashes. A fsck on a .5Tb
> > > partition would take a little longer than you might be comfortable with.
> > > Large file size support and a journalled file system useable with NFS
> > > would make me rethink this position.
> > >
> > > "Stephen G. Smith" wrote:
> > >
> > > > Can anyone recommend their favorite Network Attached Storage unit?
> > > > Up front I need 350 to 450 Gigabyte with extra bays for growth.
> > > > Need connectivity support for IRIX, Linux, and Windows (SMB).
> > > > I have found so many to choose from I though the experts here might
> > > > have like one or the other better..
> > > >
> > > > This project does not require NAS and could go with external server
> > > > attached..
> > > > Would like to stay under $15,000
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Stephen
> 
> --
> Rob Riggs
> http://www.pangalactic.org/
> _______________________________________________
> Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
> Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug