"Who breaks a butterfly upon a wheel?" It will work, but you'd have a distributed database running on a single point of failure storage fabric, thus destroying much of your benefits, unless you have enough discrete SAN units that you treat them as racks in your cassandra topology to ensure that you have data replicated across redundant SAN shelves|controllers|etc.
You also would end up with redundancy at cross purposes in that the SAN will be striping data that Cassandra is already distributing efficiently. If the SAN is free and unused, it'll be fine as a Cassandra test platform. But I wouldn't spend a penny on SAN hardware instead of a much larger distributed cluster with commodity hardware. Derive your redundancy and performance from lots of hardware in lots of places, not expensive hardware in one place. --DRS On Feb 21, 2013, at 3:42 PM, Kanwar Sangha <[email protected]> wrote: > Ok. What would be the drawbacks J > > From: Michael Kjellman [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 21 February 2013 17:12 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Cassandra with SAN > > No, this is a really really bad idea and C* was not designed for this, in > fact, it was designed so you don't need to have a large expensive SAN. > > Don't be tempted by the shiny expensive SAN. :) > > If money is no object instead throw SSD's in your nodes and run 10G between > racks > > From: Kanwar Sangha <[email protected]> > Reply-To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Date: Thursday, February 21, 2013 2:56 PM > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: Cassandra with SAN > > Hi – Is it a good idea to use Cassandra with SAN ? Say a SAN which provides > me 8 Petabytes of storage. Would I not be I/O bound irrespective of the no of > Cassandra machines and scaling by adding > machines won’t help ? > > Thanks > Kanwar > > ---------------------------------- > Copy, by Barracuda, helps you store, protect, and share all your amazing > things. Start today: www.copy.com. >
