On 04/08/2011 06:59 PM, Darren J Moffat wrote: > On 08/04/2011 17:47, Sašo Kiselkov wrote: >> In short, I think the X4540 was an elegant and powerful system that >> definitely had its market, especially in my area of work (digital video >> processing - heavy on latency, throughput and IOPS - an area, where the >> 7000-series with its over-the-network access would just be a totally >> useless brick). > > As an engineer I'm curious have you actually tried a suitably sized > S7000 or are you assuming it won't perform suitably for you ? >
No, I haven't tried a S7000, but I've tried other kinds of network storage and from a design perspective, for my applications, it doesn't even make a single bit of sense. I'm talking about high-volume real-time video streaming, where you stream 500-1000 (x 8Mbit/s) live streams from a machine over UDP. Having to go over the network to fetch the data from a different machine is kind of like building a proxy which doesn't really do anything - if the data is available from a different machine over the network, then why the heck should I just put another machine in the processing path? For my applications, I need a machine with as few processing components between the disks and network as possible, to maximize throughput, maximize IOPS and minimize latency and jitter. Cheers, -- Saso _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
