My dream FINALLY came True

[James]

Check out 45Drives at the links below
  Website: https://lmg.gg/eGo2K
  YouTube: https://lmg.gg/6ModQ

 

Buy Seagate 20TB Exos Drives
  On Amazon: https://geni.us/WFfs
  On Newegg: https://geni.us/XhkNI

 

Buy AMD EYPC 7402P CPU
  Amazon: https://geni.us/ELHlm5W
  Newegg: https://geni.us/AIBe

 

 

What better way to recover our lost data than to build a single server with over a PETABYTE of storage (1200TB)?!

 

 

 

[dogwitch]

oh my.......

[Lurick]

I remember the 12TB variants of these drives being in the news recently due to tons of failures. Let's hope the 20TB versions don't suffer the same fate

[der_gin]

Is there a possibility to get more info on how you configure this system and maybe also the wonnik 3?

 

[Lightwreather]

So, when we gonna see new new new new new new ^6 New whonnick?

/s

[Quackers101]

7 minutes ago, Lurick said:

I remember the 12TB variants of these drives being in the news recently due to tons of failures. Let's hope the 20TB versions don't suffer the same fate

Yeah, more TB and hopefully not more issues^

 

Andy was sponsored by Linus in this video!

Also nice to see jake and linus back with an actual tech video again.

[tkitch]

23 minutes ago, der_gin said:

Is there a possibility to get more info on how you configure this system and maybe also the wonnik 3?

There are plenty of tutorials on how to install and configure UNRaid or ZFS or whatever solution you like.

 

I'd check out Wendel's channel at Level One Tech.

[gopala]

i watched video

 

motherboard ASROCK ROMED8-2T

 

but SATA 10X Port only but i see you connected SATA 60x 20TB HDD

 

so u using PCIE Card Sata right

 

i can't see PCIE CARD u use

 

because i planing new PC new motherboard most sata port very limited most 8x only not enough

we need sata port more that why i need best PCIE CARD SATA must be working

 

can you tell me what u using PCIE CARD for more sata Ports

[Zodiark1593]

New name ideas for the Vaults. 
 

Vault
KiloVault

MegaVault

GigaVault. 
 

Don’t like them, TeraByte me. 

That’s my quota of crappy tech puns for the year already met.

 

[Ultraforce]

1 hour ago, der_gin said:

Is there a possibility to get more info on how you configure this system and maybe also the wonnik 3?

 

I believe Wonnick 3 has a really weird set up that they talked about to some extent in the video where they deployed it as well as new wonnik because of the software they used not being designed for a large amount of NVME SSDs and them mentioning an alternative that might have been better for some.

[MultiGamerClub]

Its weird to think.. but i saw these drives 8 years ago being made.. Glad its possible to even get ahold of these now.

[Needfuldoer]

New New (New?) Whonnock is a (rebranded) Dell PowerEdge server stuffed with PCIe NVME SSDs.

 

 

[Emtu]

It's a shame you didn't show us even just a quick and dirty dd benchmark for kicks. 

[Salv8 (sam)]

Quote

good gravy, you have to select them one by one?

Gentleman

 

 

never underestimate the power of IT admin and developer laziness.

[Spontaneocus]

14 hours ago, Salv8 (sam) said:

Gentleman

 

 

never underestimate the power of IT admin and developer laziness.

Just out of curiosity, what HBA cards are you guys using?

[Needfuldoer]

14 hours ago, Salv8 (sam) said:

Gentleman

[snip]

never underestimate the power of IT admin and developer laziness.

Yeah, I was yelling at Jake through the screen, too.

 

Tick the "all drives" box, then un-tick the boxes for the cache drives!

[alpha754293]

21 hours ago, Lurick said:

I remember the 12TB variants of these drives being in the news recently due to tons of failures. Let's hope the 20TB versions don't suffer the same fate

 

21 hours ago, Quackers101 said:

Yeah, more TB and hopefully not more issues^

 

And this is one of the reasons why I DON'T use Seagate drives.

I stay away from the like the plague.

From the Backblaze 2021 hard drive reliability report (https://www.backblaze.com/blog/backblaze-drive-stats-for-2021/)

 

Where there are multple manufacturers, Seagate leads in the annualised failure rate for 8 TB, 12 TB, 14 TB, and 16 TB capacities. They were the only manufacturer that Backblaze has or has data for for 6 TB and 10 TB capacities so there is insufficient data for a comparative analysis. And the only exception where Seagate WASN'T the leader in the annualised failure rate, is in the 4 TB capacity. That honour goes to Toshiba's MD04ABA400V.

 

But for all of the other capacities, Seagate leads in the annualised failure rate.

 

It's no wonder why Seagate sponsored this video because they are LITERALLY having to give the hard drives away and/or sell them at a discount, if they are selling them to Linus Tech Tips at all.

And once again, for about $35k in hard drives, you could've gotten your LTO-8 tape backup system for like HALF that price (which you should TOTALLY still do, BTW).

 

if you don't learn from this experience, then you will be doomed to repeat it again, even with the "better" safeguards that you've put in place this time that you didn't put in place last time.

[alpha754293]

6 hours ago, Spontaneocus said:

Just out of curiosity, what HBA cards are you guys using?

So....if I watched their previous video correctly:

 

 

at about timestamp 4' 54", it shows that they are using a LSI SAS 9305-16i SAS 12 Gbps HBA. (https://www.broadcom.com/products/storage/host-bus-adapters/sas-9305-16i)

 

So assuming that they were using the Storinator 60 from 45 Drives, they would be using four those of SAS 12 Gbps LSI 9305-16i SAS HBAs in order to be able to handle 60 drives simultaneously.

So pretty standard stuff. Nothing too special about the SAS 12 Gbps HBA.

[btmash]

4 hours ago, alpha754293 said:

 

 

And this is one of the reasons why I DON'T use Seagate drives.

I stay away from the like the plague.

From the Backblaze 2021 hard drive reliability report (https://www.backblaze.com/blog/backblaze-drive-stats-for-2021/)

 

Where there are multple manufacturers, Seagate leads in the annualised failure rate for 8 TB, 12 TB, 14 TB, and 16 TB capacities. They were the only manufacturer that Backblaze has or has data for for 6 TB and 10 TB capacities so there is insufficient data for a comparative analysis. And the only exception where Seagate WASN'T the leader in the annualised failure rate, is in the 4 TB capacity. That honour goes to Toshiba's MD04ABA400V.

 

But for all of the other capacities, Seagate leads in the annualised failure rate.

 

It's no wonder why Seagate sponsored this video because they are LITERALLY having to give the hard drives away and/or sell them at a discount, if they are selling them to Linus Tech Tips at all.

And once again, for about $35k in hard drives, you could've gotten your LTO-8 tape backup system for like HALF that price (which you should TOTALLY still do, BTW).

 

if you don't learn from this experience, then you will be doomed to repeat it again, even with the "better" safeguards that you've put in place this time that you didn't put in place last time.

It seems like this would be the repeat. And if they're not going with tapes, then they could/should be using something like AWS deep glacier which would cost them < 10k per year (and not worry about dead drives and could serve as their offsite backup)

[alpha754293]

9 hours ago, btmash said:

It seems like this would be the repeat. And if they're not going with tapes, then they could/should be using something like AWS deep glacier which would cost them < 10k per year (and not worry about dead drives and could serve as their offsite backup)

Yeah...when it comes to the cost optimisation calculus, it depends on whether they want to perpetually pay (i.e. little to no money up front in terms of capital expenditures), but where you are perpetually renting someone else's stuff, or to bite the bullet and spent the capital expediture (once), and then go with the "ownership" model instead of the "renting" model.

 

I worked out the math in this thread here:

 

That with one hundred and sixty-seven (167) 12 TB tapes, which can store 2 PB of data, plus the 16-slot tape library, plus the SAS card and the cables, they'd be out about $16-17k USD. And that would be a one-time cost.

If they only wanted 1.2 PB, then that worked out to be precisely $11999.86 USD.

(which would be about what the annual cost would be for the Amazon AWS S3 Deep Glacier cloud based storage, except that with the AWS solution, they'd be paying that year over year over year, whereas with the LTO-8 tape backup solution, they'd only have to pay for that once.

If they want to have a father-son type backup topology, then add another 100 * $66.25 USD = $6625 USD to that. If they want a grandfather-father-son backup topology, then they can add yet another 100 tapes at another $6625 USD to that. In other words, the cost for more tapes is roughly about HALF the price of the AWS S3 Deep Glacier.

On top of that, you would have to also consider time that it would take to send 1.2 PETABYTES of data to the cloud (1 Gbps fiber connection = around 100 MB/s). 1.2 PB is about 1.2e9 MB. Assuming that you can sustain 100 MB/s for the entire duration of the transfer, trying to upload 1.2 PB of data to the cloud, at 100 MB/s would take you 12 MILLION seconds or 3333.33 hours or 138.89 days.

Conversely, with my LTO-8 tape system that I have at home, I can send data to the tapes at anywhere between 200-300 MB/s. Therefore; even on the low end, I would take HALF of that time. And that's with one drive.

If LTT bites the bullet even further, and say they buy a system with FOUR drives instead of just one (which ups their initial capex costs), that will cut their time down to about a QUARTER of what it would take to upload 1.2 PB of data to AWS in terms of time. (And AWS charges a little bit for the data transfer as well.)

My point is that there are LOTS of options available at different price points and the optimization calculus can be done in order to figure out what would be the better solution for what their needs are.

(Personally, I would get a system with 4 tape drives or multple 16-slot, single (or dual) drive autoloaders (which again, increases the initial capex costs), but then you'd be able to read and write from multiple tapes at a time and if it means that your workers will sometimes have to pull out some tapes from the magazine to put other tapes in so that you would be able to pull archive footage from it, then so be it. Or you can make one person be the gate keeper of it instead of spending a LOT more money on a robotic tape library that would do that all for you. That way, that person would know what tapes are currently loaded into which magazine, and if they need to swap tapes in the magazines, they would know which magazine they would have to swap it out from. It's amazing to me that you can get a 16-slot, single drive tape autoloader for less money than what I paid for my single, drive that I had to load manually. (Source: https://www.backupworks.com/Quantum-superloader-3-LTO-8-16-Slot.aspx) )

 

And if they want an offsite backup, they can literally just buy another batch of tapes, and put them in an environmentally controlled, storage facility.

 

If AWS offered this as an option, it would actually be faster for LTT to buy four tape drives, write the data to the drives TWICE and then ship a set of the tapes to AWS to be the cloud host (rather than uploading it), and they'd STILL come out ahead, in terms of time (because they can then write the third set, on prem, themselves).

 

The AWS Deep Glacier is just using AWS' tapes rather than LTT's own.

 

And I'm the literal proof that it's not that difficult to set up because I'm an idiot by many accounts and if I, as an idiot, can set it up, I see little to no reason as to why the team over at LTT, can't do the same.

 

And I am sure that there are other people who have more knowledge and experience in this area that would be able to help the LTT team out if they need additional help in getting their tape library up and running for their needs, that way, they will actually learn from this (finally, this time around) rather than being doomed to repeat the same mistakes over and over and over again.

[Spontaneocus]

22 hours ago, alpha754293 said:

So....if I watched their previous video correctly:

 

 

at about timestamp 4' 54", it shows that they are using a LSI SAS 9305-16i SAS 12 Gbps HBA. (https://www.broadcom.com/products/storage/host-bus-adapters/sas-9305-16i)

 

So assuming that they were using the Storinator 60 from 45 Drives, they would be using four those of SAS 12 Gbps LSI 9305-16i SAS HBAs in order to be able to handle 60 drives simultaneously.

So pretty standard stuff. Nothing too special about the SAS 12 Gbps HBA.

Thanks!

[Matej Bodnar]

ZFS doesn't like Seagate Exos. We tried multiple 1.8TB Exos disks with 'badblocks' linux app finishing with no error. But checking the SMART shows huge number of errors corrected by ECC. And we believe that is the reason ZFS thinks disk is faulty and it shows you the warning "too many errors". For example Toshiba had 0 errors corrected by ECC after more than 6 months of 24/7 usage, WD disks is not showing this type of errors and brand new Exos after one check with 'badblocks' had 1757439058 errors corrected by ECC. Try to check SMART of yours Exos disks before relying on them in your new new vault 3.

[YellowJersey]

Oh Jake, you so sassy

 

[GodAtum]

Why doesn't he invest in a proper commerical storage solution like EMC?

[maskmcgee]

Again, 10 years of storing every video file ever recorded and a grand total of 0 uses of that archive. It's obvious why he dosen't want to spend 10k a year storing this, because it'd never be used.