Have you considered a blade chassis? Then you can get most of the redundancy of having lots of small nodes in few(er) rack units.
SuperMicro has a chassis that can accommodate 14 servers in 4U: https://www.supermicro.com/en/products/superblade/enclosure#4U - Max > On Aug 2, 2021, at 12:05 pm, Joe Obernberger <joseph.obernber...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Thank you Jeff. Consider that if rack space is at a premium, what would make > the most sense? > > -Joe > > On 8/2/2021 2:46 PM, Jeff Jirsa wrote: >> IF you bought a server with that topology, you would definitely want to run >> lots of instances, perhaps 24, to effectively utilize that disk space. >> >> You'd also need 24 IPs, and you'd need a NIC that could send/receive 24x the >> normal bandwidth. And the cost of rebuilding such a node would be 24x higher >> than normal (so consider how many of those you'd have in a cluster, and how >> often they'd fail). >> >> >> >> On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 11:06 AM Joe Obernberger >> <joseph.obernber...@gmail.com <mailto:joseph.obernber...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> We have a large amount of data to be stored in Cassandra, and if we were >> to purchase new hardware in limited space, what would make the most sense? >> Dell has machines with 24, 8TByte drives in a 2u configuration. Given >> Cassandra's limitations (?) to large nodes, would it make sense to run >> 24 copies of Cassandra on that one node (one per drive)? >> Thank you! >> >> -Joe >> >> >> >> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> >> Virus-free. www.avg.com >> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> >> <x-msg://42/#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
