[lug] Favorite NAS
rob at pangalactic.org
Fri Feb 23 18:51:21 MST 2001
Reiserfs (for the time being) is incompatible with NFS. That is being
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).
> 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
More information about the LUG