Hello, On Sat, Nov 11, 2023 at 04:01:47PM -0800, David Christensen wrote: > SSD RAID10 is very impressive when everything else matches. Backups over a > Gigabit LAN onto SATA III SSD RAID10 does not make sense because Gigabit > Ethernet is rated for 1 Gbps read/ write and a SATA III SSD RAID10 is rated > for 24 Gbps read and 12 Gbps write. I would put HDD's in the backup server > and put the SSD's in the workstation.
I agree with you when it comes to systems that are used purely for backups in a style that mimics tape backup, i.e. rare need for random access, which from what I understand does cover Gene's situation as Gene is used to using Amanda for backups, which is a (virtual) tape paradigm. However, especially in a home setting, people often ask more of "the server", turning it into something that isn't entirely, or even primarily, a backup server. If those uses involve random access, SSD of some kind will be very beneficial. Also there are quite a few backup technologies that do use random access a lot. A venerable one often mentioned on this list is rsnapshot or its basic implementation using rsync. This walks the entire backup tree at every iteration checking metadata and creating hardlinks. The period of time spent deciding what to back up and how often massively exceeds the time spent transferring and writing the data with these systems. They will also massively benefit from low latency storage on SSD. So just as a word of caution -- and I know you know this, David -- I want to say check how much random access is going on, before deciding rotational media will cut it. Thanks, Andy PS I stated this before and I have to say it again though: while building a dedicated backup system seems like a great idea for Gene's use case, the practical situation for Gene is that he's been trying for literal years now to make a very simple RAID10 mdadm work on perfectly serviceable hardware. This should be a simple task, but it's not gone well for him and this list is unable to get to the bottom of why (I include myself in that, but I think it reflects more on communications difficulties than a shortcoming of Linux mdadm). I am at a loss as to why, given those facts, people are still advising Gene to build an entire new system out of parts. It makes sense for the use case but not for the user. I don't think it's supportable. For this user I would have to still stand by my advice of buying an off-the-shelf NAS. -- https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting
