On Sep 3, 2009, at 6:20 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
On Thu Sep 3 20:53:13 EDT 2009, r...@sun.com wrote:
"None of those technologies [NFS, iSCSI, FC] scales as cheaply,
reliably, goes as big, nor can be managed as easily as stand-alone
pods
with their own IP address waiting for requests on HTTPS."
http://blog.backblaze.com/2009/09/01/petabytes-on-a-budget-how-to-build-cheap-cloud-storage/
Apart from the obvious comment that I swear I used a quote like that
to justify 9P more than once, I'm very curious to know how Plan9
would perform on such a box.
Erik, do you have any comments?
i'm speaking for myself, and not for anybody else here.
i do work for coraid, and i do do what i believe. so
cavet emptor.
i think coraid's cost/petabyte is pretty competitive.
they sell 48TB 3u unit for about 20% more. though
one could not build 1 of these machines since the
case is not commercially available.
i see some warning signs about this setup. it stands
out to me that they use desktop-class drives and the
drives appear hard to swap out. the bandwith out
of the box is 125MB/s max.
aside from that, here's what i see as what you get for
that extra 20%:
- fully-supported firmware,
- full-bandwith to the disk (no port multpliers)
- double the network bandwidth
- ecc memory,
- a hot swap case with ses-2 lights so the tech doesn't
grab the wrong drive,
oh, and the coraid unit works with plan 9. :-)
*with*, not *on* right?
Now, the information above is quite useful, yet my question
was more along the lines of -- if one was to build such
a box using Plan 9 as the software -- would it be:
1. feasible
2. have any advantages over Linux + JFS
Thanks,
Roman.
