Posted February 4, 2017 I challenge Linus to make that server (to scale or calculate) to consume no more than 1.45 Watts per TB of usable space, assuming RAID-6. Rules: Max. Total TDP 1450W per PB of usable space, RAID-6. 1 CPU core = 3 HDD 1 GiB RAM/TB of raw space 3 GB of SSD (SLC, eMLC or MLC) cache per TB of raw space Has a speed of 1 GB/s write and 2 GB/s read. Can Linus do it? I doubt it. But in my calculations, it IS possible. (The efficient ones are below 1.4W/TB usable, but I can make below 1.1W/TB usable.) Enjoy ur headache Linus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 4, 2017 Why? Not only that if you wanted a very energy and space efficient 1PB of space you would only use SSD which would easily come under the quoted power specifications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 4, 2017 I think that it is possible since he has been working with 45Drives and Seagate to try to make this possible and knowing him he will use the 10/100/1000/10000 NIC cards and try to set up a higher bandwidth and with centOS and ZFS i think he will be able to. Edit: Also centOS is a better linux os for lightweight minimal systems and file servers. I know for me i would use Debian myself cause im just more custom to that linux distro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 4, 2017 4 minutes ago, ssfdre38 said: I think that it is possible since he has been working with 45Drives and Seagate to try to make this possible and knowing him he will use the 10/100/1000/10000 NIC cards and try to set up a higher bandwidth and with centOS and ZFS i think he will be able to. And he's using the largest available HDDs so won't need as many to get 1PB. That and it's not a single server giving 1PB either, doing that would be a horrific data loss risk . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 4, 2017 1 minute ago, leadeater said: And he's using the largest available HDDs so won't need as many to get 1PB. That and it's not a single server giving 1PB either, doing that would be a horrific data loss risk . oh i know i saw and i saw he is going to toss a couple of SSDs for a cache but i would also try and run a backup server dedi for it just for recovery Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 4, 2017 1 minute ago, ssfdre38 said: oh i know i saw and i saw he is going to toss a couple of SSDs for a cache but i would also try and run a backup server dedi for it just for recovery Once you get large enough backups just aren't possible for technical and financial reasons. With these distributed file systems and object based storage systems you build in a lot of resiliency and rely on that plus versioning. In an object based storage system when you delete or modify a file you actually make another version of it so you can revert/restore each version you like, up till the retention settings you specify. Backing up huge amounts of data becomes a bandwidth and time issue along with needing somewhere to store the backup. Not only that with backups you tend to want multiple recovery points so the backup data size is far greater than the source data. You can use things like deduplication to reduce the raw disk space required to store the backups, for example we have over 8PB of backup data with another copy in a different city and the actual raw disk space is around 400TB for that 8PB. Object based storage systems can also move data to slower and cheaper storage as it gets old and less used, all the way down to tape if you want. So for the above challenge I could just use a large tape library connected to the server and put a couple of tape drive heads in it and then fill with hundreds of LTO-7 tapes at 6TB raw or 12.8TB compressed each to get the 1PB then add a few SSDs and HDDs to service the hot data, that would use only a tiny amount of power . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 4, 2017 yea that is true and i see the url that 45Drives is doing about it http://www.45drives.com/products/cluster/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 4, 2017 1 hour ago, ssfdre38 said: yea that is true and i see the url that 45Drives is doing about it http://www.45drives.com/products/cluster/ They've had that up for a while, really good information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 4, 2017 On 2/4/2017 at 0:57 AM, leadeater said: Why? Not only that if you wanted a very energy and space efficient 1PB of space you would only use SSD which would easily come under the quoted power specifications. I'm working on an undisclosed SSD storage server right now that has 1.2PB of storage and only uses 700 watts from the wall. My native language is C++ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 4, 2017 2 minutes ago, tt2468 said: I'm working on an undisclosed SSD storage server right now that has 1.2PB of storage and only uses 700 watts from the wall. That using SSD's larger than 16TB each? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 4, 2017 On 2/4/2017 at 2:11 PM, leadeater said: That using SSD's larger than 16TB each? Can't say here. I will pm you though My native language is C++ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 4, 2017 Just now, tt2468 said: Can't say here. I will pm you though No problem, bet its positively tiny in rack space compared to HDD equivalent. Netapp showed us a comparison of a 96U HDD SAN consolidated down to 6U using their new all flash arrays. Same amount of storage at higher performance, less power and less space. SSDs are just awesome . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 4, 2017 1 hour ago, leadeater said: No problem, bet its positively tiny in rack space compared to HDD equivalent. Netapp showed us a comparison of a 96U HDD SAN consolidated down to 6U using their new all flash arrays. Same amount of storage at higher performance, less power and less space. SSDs are just awesome . We use the FAS8080 all flash array in our environment and it performs extremely well. Sad part is the enormous Cost:TB. We tried to get close with QNAP and all-flash storage, while it was fast the OS was problematic (along with inconsistent bit failures on the SSDs). Now we're trying vmwares VSAN with all-flash storage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 4, 2017 25 minutes ago, Dark said: We use the FAS8080 all flash array in our environment and it performs extremely well. Sad part is the enormous Cost:TB. We tried to get close with QNAP and all-flash storage, while it was fast the OS was problematic (along with inconsistent bit failures on the SSDs). Now we're trying vmwares VSAN with all-flash storage. Try Nutanix, Storage Spaces and EMC XtremeIO (I think? The software one). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 4, 2017 1 minute ago, leadeater said: Try Nutanix, Storage Spaces and EMC ExtremeIO. Honestly, I pitched Storage Spaces pretty hard (even did a deployment at my house on all flash), but my partners couldn't get past Windows being the 'controllers'. I even sent over dells multi-head SAS configuration (dual servers with shared SAS connections across all shelves). The company was tainted by EMC in the past so I don't know when/if I'd be able to get them back in the door, I'm just happy they let me start bringing in Dells versus continuing to populate our UCS chassis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 4, 2017 26 minutes ago, Dark said: We use the FAS8080 all flash array in our environment and it performs extremely well. We just put one in too, not using it for anything yet. Sad part is we only got it since we had budget to spend and if we didn't use it it would be gone, can't carry the money over to the next year. It's only small, I think 24x 800GB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 4, 2017 1 minute ago, Dark said: The company was tainted by EMC in the past so I don't know when/if I'd be able to get them back in the door, I'm just happy they let me start bringing in Dells versus continuing to populate our UCS chassis. Yea we also got burned by EMC, really badly. We had a hardware failure and they tried to blame it on one of our engineers and said he did it on purpose. They got told to go truck themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 4, 2017 1 minute ago, leadeater said: We just put one in too, not using it for anything yet. Sad part is we only got it since we had budget to spend and if we didn't use it it would be gone, can't carry the money over to the next year. It's only small, I think 24x 800GB. You'll enjoy it once you get it under use. We can't get away from snapmanager at the moment (it's too convenient), so the netapp will remain as our db storage for the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 5, 2017 1 minute ago, leadeater said: Netapp brought SolidFire lol, well then...won't be making that call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 5, 2017 https://www.purestorage.com/products/flashblade.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now