Paolo Aglialoro wrote: > A fundamental element missing from the 1st mail is on which hardware should > run your software-defined NAS and for which use. > > I exclude you are talking about several nodes, on which you can run Ceph or > GlusterFS filesystems. >
"Ceph & Gluster are WILDLY different solutions to different problems." https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/9onemk/ceph_vs_glusterfs/ OP is taking about home NAS. That pretty much means that the files will be accessed by SSHFS, NFS, or CIFS. Note that OmniOS has a kernel implementation of CIFS unlike FreeBSD. GlusterFS just like SSHFS, NFS, or CIFS allows access to files from multiple hosts sharing via a computer network with some added dough. Those files still have to be stored on the HW/Soft RAID on the top of some file system UFS, H1/2, ZFS, XFS. I am only aware of the native Linux GlusterFS client. For all practical purposes you will be using NFS client. Deciding between GlusterFS vs NFS is not an easy thing https://www.catalyst.net.nz/blog/our-glusterfs-experiences Quite a few US national laboratories and super computing centers use GlusterFS typically Red Hat (or clones) servers. Red Hat has officially support only XFS storage. However most people use ZFS as a backend. ZFS is a third party kernel module on Linux which is very adverse to such modules. It is major pain in the rear end to run comparing to Illumos or FreeBSD but I know lot of big shops who are doing exactly that. Personally if I had to design such a large network-attached distributed storage file system I would use non-Linux ZFS for a backend which will be mounted via iSCSI on Red Hat (or clone) GlusterFS servers. FreeBSD iSCSI implementation used to be PITA and an afterthought. Illumis has an excellent iSCSI implementation but I understand why most people will be apprehensive about deploying anything Illumos based. I have no idea how is any of this related to OpenBSD or for that matter any BSD since initial FreeBSD port of GlusterFS is obsolete not upgraded for many years. > Is it a single full size multi-disk server planned for intensive activity? > In this case don't reinvent the wheel, you got: > - FreeNAS > - napp-it (over solaris/omnios/openindiana) > - Nexenta This is a really bad advise! As somebody who foolishly built a few FreeNAS based sites and dismantled many more as paid jobs I could not agree more with this blog post https://smbitjournal.com/tag/freenas/ Again this has nothing to do with OpenBSD. OpenBSD file server with soft RAID1 mirror (for high availability and redundancy) will be more than adequate for most home users. It is super simple and sysutils/bitrot is sufficient protection from slow decay. Predrag > Just don't forget to substitute whatever raid SAS controller with an IT > mode enabled one (e.g. LSI 2308) in order to really benefit of ZFS. > > Is it for home use? Why not considering some low consumption hardware? If > you want multidisk RAID just buy a qnap/synology. > > If one disk is enough, buy Odroid HC2 which mounts 3.5" SATA disks, where a > 6TB one fits perfectly. Dunno if OpenBSD may install on it (armhf v7 arch), > but for sure either armbian or openmediavault are good choices to run on, > having full 1Gb/s throughput and consuming even less current than some > famous brand NAS, like the ones named before. > > This said, if the aim of the project is just having fun creating a NAS from > scratch on casual hardware running OpenBSD for the sake of it, I shut my > mouth. > > Have phun!
