IT Discussion

• 

  Revisiting ZFS and FreeNAS in 2019
  • JaredBusch  

  118
  2
  Votes
  118
  Posts
  201
  Views

  

  holy - comedy. I cant even begin to comprehend how bad this is .
• 

  UNSOLVED Need a script to cleanup a Backblaze B2 bucket
  script backblaze backblaze b2 cleanup • • JaredBusch  

  6
  0
  Votes
  6
  Posts
  21
  Views

  

  @Emad-R said in Need a script to cleanup a Backblaze B2 bucket: If you can keep the backup locally, The scenario was clearly stated. The local and remote retention periods are different.
• 

  Transparent compression on folders in EXT4/XFS etc?
  zfs btrfs compression xfs ext4 • • Pete.S  

  18
  1
  Votes
  18
  Posts
  52
  Views

  

  @scottalanmiller said in Transparent compression on folders in EXT4/XFS etc?: @dafyre said in Transparent compression on folders in EXT4/XFS etc?: Edit: I'm going to put my Zabbix instance on it later and see how it does. Databases should not be compressed! Details as to why databases should not be compressed?
• 

  SOLVED folder sharing issue
  windows 7 smb share foldersharing • • WrCombs  

  70
  1
  Votes
  70
  Posts
  148
  Views

  

  @WrCombs said in folder sharing issue: Have since tried to uninstall the nic and make registry changes (there were a lot that were out of wack apparently) but with no luck still. edit Upon this and changing registry keys I was able to get it to communicate and work properly. @scottalanmiller seemed confused in the ML wrap up video SO I thought I'd elaborate on what resolved my issue.... well Kind of. ... All I know is one of these fixed it - . HKLM\system\current control set\services\CSC\ start = 0 HKLM\System\Current Control Set\Services\NetBT\Parameters\UseNewSMB set to 0 Uninstalling reinstalling NIC
• 

  Synology pushing to Backblaze B2 at 50mbps
  synology backblaze backblaze b2 • • JaredBusch  

  22
  4
  Votes
  22
  Posts
  297
  Views

  

  @wrx7m said in Synology pushing to Backblaze B2 at 50mbps: @JaredBusch said in Synology pushing to Backblaze B2 at 50mbps: @dbeato said in Synology pushing to Backblaze B2 at 50mbps: @JaredBusch I am not sure how you have been doing with this, but basically what I have found is that after a couple months the key with B2 does not work any longer and we need to add it again so we are constantly monitoring it. If you get into that issue maybe you can see something I did not see. Around 6pm today stuff stopped moving. I was stupid and dind't screenshot the Synology before rebooting, but is just said "Connecting" It is currently rebooting. Did the Synology stop responding on the network at this point or did the transfer just stop? That has nothing to do with today's conversation.
• 

  Veeam Restore points clarification
  veeam veeam backup and replication settings • • JaredBusch  

  5
  1
  Votes
  5
  Posts
  41
  Views

  

  This should be fine. I have a similar configuration with restore points and it works as designed.
• 

  Database held for ransom, anyone experience this before?
  • donaldlandru  

  10
  0
  Votes
  10
  Posts
  79
  Views

  

  All your database are belong to us. Um, them.
• C

  SOLVED Ubuntu 18.04 Space Issue
  • Curtis  

  46
  0
  Votes
  46
  Posts
  54
  Views

  

  @Curtis said in Ubuntu 18.04 Space Issue: Anyone have some recommended readings that might help me wrap my head around this? https://mangolassi.it/topic/7825/sam-learning-linux-system-administration/ Down at storage and filesystems.
• 

  Why We Recommend Against OpenFiler
  storage openfiler • • scottalanmiller  

  8
  5
  Votes
  8
  Posts
  1113
  Views

  

  @360col said in Why We Recommend Against OpenFiler: my god openfiler is still around? I remember playing with it and wanting to use it but never ending up using in the end. One of the reason was it barely updated. Not really, apparently died a LONG time ago.
• 

  Responding Post by Post to be polite
  • scottalanmiller  

  7
  0
  Votes
  7
  Posts
  57
  Views

  

  @xrobau said in Responding Post by Post to be polite: And look, you'll respond to this one, and then 15 things later you'll realise you never responded to the first thing. Just because I respond to you bringing up new things as it happens doesn't mean I didn't realize that my write up of the first thing wasn't complete yet. It's a standard thing to use topics like this one to attempt to derail a discussion when someone doesn't like where it is going, as is writing a wall of text. Which is why I've taken the time to 1) never post in that way as walls of texts are inappropriate in an honest back and forth - it's the written equivalent of yelling in someone's face instead of talking 2) write up basic explanations so that people know that this has been thought through, discussed, and published ahead of time so it would never be logical or excusable to throw it into the middle of another discussion in an attempt to change the subject or misdirect readers. We even have names for these two things. Wall of Text attacks, and Derailment Attacks. The first is when you post lots of separate thoughts into one to make it difficult to track the point, difficult for anyone to follow what you are talking about, and blocks everyone else from being able to effectively respond. It's used traditional in an attempt to shut down a person when you expect that they have good information and will be able to respond quickly as a way to try to stall them while you blast with stored up "yelling". It's used not only to silence someone else who is in a conversation, but also to attempt to discourage others from joining and participating because it increases the barrier to response. It's basically a challenge - trying to force someone to answer every possible point at once in the hopes that they will respond to none. It's super well known and isn't going to fly in any professional community. A derailment attack is a misdirection that people do when they want to change the subject and to try to throw blame on the other party. So in the middle of a conversation they will throw in a non-sequitur of suddenly discussing something totally irrelevant that is generally about how to post or what is a derailment (derailment-ception) which is obviously unrelated to the subject at hand and should be a totally different thread, so that people are forced to defend the topic generally causing the whole thing to derail and lose coherency. Thankfully we've been doing this a long time and know this tactics and are familiar with how they are used when someone is trying to brute force shut someone down. The community rewards these through mods that can't follow the conversation (both tactics confuse mods as well, so in a community with irregular moderation they can be pretty effective.) So as you can see, we are aware of what was being attempted, and are not so easily confused as forums you are used to.
• 

  Data check/scrub RAID 1 - how often?
  md raid raid 1 • • Pete.S  

  8
  0
  Votes
  8
  Posts
  70
  Views

  

  This write up sums it up well. It's a "it depends." It depends because it impacts you potentially and generally isn't very important. So therefore, there is no hard and fast guideline. https://serverfault.com/questions/588217/how-often-should-i-scrub-my-raid
• 

  GTD System
  • BRRABill  

  5
  1
  Votes
  5
  Posts
  374
  Views

  S

  We use todoist. Seams reasonable.
• 

  Protek Support MSP Ransomware Hits Customers in Salt Lake City, Utah
  security ransomware msp breach • • scottalanmiller  

  87
  6
  Votes
  87
  Posts
  1161
  Views

  

  Another company follow up while I'm thinking about them. Their social media has remained totally silent since Feb 4th. And their blog that was always a twice weekly thing has been silent since a few days before that. The news reports definitely continue to seem to have been real, contrary to what they stated. Goes to their blog one week before the compromise.
• 

  Common Myths We Hear from the FreeNAS Community
  storage zfs freenas • • scottalanmiller  

  3
  4
  Votes
  3
  Posts
  472
  Views

  

  Way more discussion about this thread in this other thread: https://mangolassi.it/topic/19657/revisiting-zfs-and-freenas-in-2019
• 

  Open Storage Solutions at SpiceWorld 2010
  storage scott alan miller spiceworld open storage • • scottalanmiller  

  7
  2
  Votes
  7
  Posts
  1293
  Views

  

  Transcript: so my name is Scott Alan Miller that's all I'll tell you about me because honestly no one actually cares and so if I talk about myself I'm boring and narcissistic and one of the rules of presentations is it could be boring it could be narcissistic people so this talk is on open storage I think it's called open storage landscapes and I think there's a lot of no one's quite sure what I'm gonna be talking about what I want to do here is not look at specific technology implementations or some real specifics but my goal today is to have you come away with a different vision a different appreciation for storage and the storage landscape and and exactly what your options are and how to approach thinking about storage in general when it's oranje that is a major problem for all companies today whether you're you know a tiny shop or you're a giant enterprise that sort of expensive storage is critical in reality nothing is more important in your business than your storage if you lose everything from a processing perspective and save your storage or your voice then you're recoverable but if you lose all your storage and keep your processing you're screwed so so storage is very very important but we have a very we tend to look at it in very strange ways kind of forgetting how storage actually works under the hood so I kind of want to start off by going through some real basics of storage and try to present it in a little bit of an interesting way and then I want to talk about the concepts of open storage and how that applies to to your businesses and some reference implementations of how that might be something that you would want to do and when that might make sense because my format is very very loose I don't work with slides because they're distracting and I can kind of scale the speed very easily so I'm gonna be a lot more open to people asking questions as we go try to keep it kind of related to where I am but if you want to jump in and it's kind of ladies will tackle it as we go because I could very easily you know miss something that's valuable for everybody so alright so in the beginning right when when computers first began the very first thing we needed was well we have this computer so we need to store stuff so the very first thing that we got was the hard drive I realize this is not a bit hard drive the hard drive was simple right has one spindle it's store stuff everybody understood that right very very easy there's nothing complex it's a physical device and we attach it to a computer so this is our server we refer to servers as boxes we can demonstrate them as so what we did with it was our very first server the first server because we took this hard drive the first hard drive ever and we literally took a cable that actually looked like that babe right I'm stuck inside we're now directly attached one drive directly in Tetris get attached inside your server the connection technology was very very simple right we know today is scuzzy yes there's something before it but basically scuzzy was the beginning of real storage it is a generally simplistic technology but it does have the ability to dress but to address more than one drive so we started putting more drives in service once we had more than one driving service they said well this is a problem so we took that drive when we said this is a point of failure we lose this drive we have nothing obviously can have backups hopefully you're following Daniels advice and have made good backups and you can get a new hard drive and keep going but we're also concerned about not just recovery which is where backup comes into play but continuity of business which is where with redundancy come from the place so in order to get redundancy we said well you know what if we had two drives which we already had we had multiple drives and we said well what if we built an abstraction layer and put these together half the entertainment just watching it works doctor so we take these hard drives and we literally put them together in a way that for an outside observer it's one drive hands bigger but it's the same thing right we call this rate so in this case it's raid one so these drives in my example are mirrored to each other but not important so the key element here is that when we use raid we are taking multiple independent devices and we are attaching them together in such a way that when we then attach it to the computer alright and there's a little bit more than duct tape involved here imagine this duct tape includes a RAID controller right and that RAID controller provides that abstraction layer so that your computer when it sees this block of storage right it's still connected using the same technology that the single drive was connected with and is connected in the same way and when the server when the operating system looks at your raid array it is looking at one drive it has no idea how many physical devices are in play it believes that there is a single logical drive so this was the first step of making enterprise storage right and this was a pretty good step once we got to this point we could really do business with servers so what happened from here was we started getting a lot of these right oh that one fell out don't bite from that manufacturer and and we said well we don't have a lot of spaces in these boxes they get hot they fill up with other things we want to have a lot more than two drives I don't have two drives my example but what if we had to eat and drive right what if we wanted to do that well why not put these same drives outside the box it's not where the term came from so we came up with the ability to literally take skuzzy same technology nothing's changed we changed the cable so there's a little bit more resilient to our interference and we attached drive outside of the box this is where the term direct attached storage came from kind of denote that this is what we're doing as far as the server is concerned they're still drives inside the computer nothing has changed to the servers perspective it's just literally they're outside the case rather than inside the case you can do this with a running server pop off the top yank a car drive and as far as the cable will go you can just dangle your ear drive but basically what's happening in a physically managed way so that you're not catching fire shorting something out and this gave us the next step of storage we were able to do more advanced things but nothing has changed as far as the server's concerned it has one drive that's it and it's everything is operating the same so then at some point we said well I like how this looks like scuzzy cable works out really well so the later we said and this could be anything right so early on OA scuzzy but now there's lots of options for this today we've got sass we've got SATA we've got USB we have firewire we have Fiber Channel right lots of options but they all do almost exactly the same thing which is very little so with the more advanced of these technologies right we started saying well we could instead of simply attaching the drives to the server in a way that the it's really really physically directly attached that's not necessarily useful we might want to have our drives farther away well if we're gonna do that we're going to need a little bit more advanced communication so scuzzy is traditionally it's very much like I love this example it's basically like Ethernet not switched Ethernet that we use today it's like Ethernet long cable vampire taps everything communicates at the same time interrupting if each other so scuzzy was kind of inefficient and it really wasn't going to scale so we moved to different technologies for large implementations and the first thing that really came into play was fiber champ and the thing that makes fiber channel different than scuzzy is that scuzzy is really a non lair to networking connection right it doesn't really have what we think of as Ethernet addressing style machine level addressing with fiber channel we have machine level addressing so it's a full layer 2 networks protocol which also USB and firewire are just not on the same scale so when we did that we said oh well now we can switch these connections and I don't have all the cabling here that it would be necessary to demonstrate this but what's interesting is suddenly we could take all these drives just like we had before and sit them in a box and put a bunch of servers over here and just have a switch in the middle and connect the drives and connect the servers and using the switch we can tell which ones connected to which and what we have is rudimentary Sam right and the most simple devices you can get a hold of like your neck your SC 101 is literally two drives in a little plastic container with the smallest chip you've ever seen and the only thing it does is act as a very very simplistic drive controller and puts zzn protocol on to the wire and that's it no logic no nothing it is basically a network card and you combine Network written small network cards that attach directly - I'm sure they exist for sass but I've seen them for old-school parallel data plug them in and you literally have a network connection on the drive nothing else no raid no management no anything the computer still sees the block device that it saw when it's plugged in internally plugged in externally plugged in through fibre channel switch whatever so nothing has changed as far as the computers concerned so what we started doing then right is we said well now these drives are out here this was kind of an experimental stage this wasn't a stage that lasted very long with all these old drives in fact it said well if we took all these drives and we put them into another box another server and instead of being rudimentary like the SC 101 we've got a big box with an eye specifically got a larger box so that we could hold lots of drives right this box might end up being several racks in size we can hold hundreds of draws thousands of drives in a single box and now we have all these abstractions that already exists we have the r8 abstraction that allows this machine to remember this as a server to see those drives as a single drive and we have networking technologies like fibre channel that allow this to share out those drives as block devices to any device that wants to read a block device right so these are acting the same as any other block device you're going to see right whether it's we think of storage as its own thing but storage drives networking they're all blocked devices to the system so they're all acting exactly the same it's just the way that we look at them so we get our I don't have the switch here so just imagine they're switching okay so we have our fiber channel connection we're gonna attach it from this server which has all the drives over to this server which is where we want the data so yes yes yes correct so this is a server that we have made purposed to storage and this is a server that's doing you know who knows what the normal stuff probably with no Drive or could have its own drives plus these struts you can mix and match so now we have dedicated devices but as far as this server is concerned it still sees a scuzzy connection a fiber channel connection whatever so we're still dealing with the the same technology this is what's interesting is that we start to think oh weird things are happening but as far as the server is concerned nothing has happened it's still just that drive connected directly so then after this stage right we said okay so we're going to introduce another abstraction layer to the network and we're going to pump fibre channel over tcp/ip so we introduced ice Guzzi which is the fiber channels goes here basically the same protocols very very close I scuzzy is simply taking the original scuffie protocol and encapsulating it in tcp/ip so that I scuzzy leaves this box I'm sorry scuzzy leaves this box goes into an encapsulation layer that allows scuzzy be transported over tcp/ip and then it gets taken out on this box and its back to scuzzy so it's a device layer it is still seeing a single scuzzy drive connected nothing has changed so that really brings us to modern storage as far as a block level storage is concerned I'm trying to avoid the obvious words that every knows I'm talking about so this is a server normal server which is very very important it's a normal storage server this is a normal computing device and everything is viewed as block devices if we take this server and we then apply an interface to it that makes it very very easy to manage it makes it no longer look like a normal server but look like a dedicated storage server take away the options of processing on it add in some perhaps ease of management type things we then call it appliance sized and we refer to it as a sand but there's no difference to a sand from a storage server except that it has an interface that makes it work not like the regular server that's so so this is the really interesting point we have all this processing power here and so if we then let this server not just share out the lock level devices without touching them with you know when we're dealing with this at this level this machine is effectively dumb it doesn't know what's on the disks it doesn't know how to use them it doesn't know how to read them it can have if this could be a window server and those drives that are in it could be loaded with Linux file system of Solaris file systems it can't read them they can't do anything with them but it can share them out because it's purely a block level device if we then add more power to this box more power from a software perspective and said okay we're gonna make it in this box able to read these discs and understand them then we can start getting even more power because we can start doing things here without sending it over there first so we can add new protocols onto this box that give us not block level sharing we can still have that this is all still going on but this box now can read these drives right there this is new layer so we add in a protocol that allows this to share a file system layer instead of the block layer and to do this obviously this machine has to understand it too we need to be able to put it onto the network so specific filesystem abstractions are made for this and we know them today is NFS sips AFS these are popular protocols for this what makes them different than blooded block level is that at the file system layer this device can determine if there's been changes to a file and only Sandover changes it can make changes you can do all kinds of things including that's very very important it can lock single file from you which means that this server is contacting this box and wants to write to a file this server can lock that file and say no one else can write to it which means it for the first time we have a means of having this connection go to more than one server you can do this with block level devices back in the early days when we had literally hard drives inside servers people would actually take this scuzzy cable hook one end into one server one hand into another server and dangle a hard drive off the middle anak would cause obviously disaster you have to drive controllers it's like having two steering wheels in the car and two people driving without being able to see each other or talk right one person wants go this way one person's go that way one first the fitment gas the person's hitting the brake you know deer runs out in the road each one thinks a different directions way to go you're gonna have a disaster and that's what servers do if there's two servers talking to a single hard drive not aware of each other so there are specific file systems that were designed to be able to handle that where but each server had to play nice there's no gatekeeper so any server that decided to mess with the data was going to and it could make changes that the other one didn't know about it could delete files that the other one tried to protect they could read files the other one said it shouldn't be allowed to read there's no way to control those things so there was a gatekeeper when we're dealing with file system level sharing we have that gatekeeper we have the security at this level where we control it we don't have an open connection somewhere that someone can do anything they can get access to so at this point most people know that a device that's doing this is called a file server if we then in the same manner of taking this storage server adding an abstraction layer to it so that it looks like a non-standard server we call it ass and we do the same thing with file a little storage and we call it a mass at no point is this not a traditional file server it is simply applying sized so that it looks like a different device and takes some of the options of doing some general things so the reason that I wanted to run through that is because quite often when dealing with Santa Ness we actually think of the world in terms of fan of that we say well we have storage right should I have santur Nass and in reality those aren't those aren't really the questions we're asking what we should be asking is do we need block-level storage or do we need files at the lowest or and that's the big question if you're running a database and it needs to be able to interface directly with the devices because it does something really complex which is basically have its own file system and ignore the actual so you know if you're running IBM db2 IBM db2 to these raw devices supports discs because it has its own file system that it's only for the database has no other purpose so it has to have block level access so they can do anything at one for the drive head but if you're dealing with normal file sharing right Word documents Excel documents all the stuff that users have piled up everywhere yes you can do that at the block level and attach it to a single device yes you can go get really expensive commercial file systems that allow you to share that out like Oh F Oh CF from pork right and GFS too from Red Hat but you're getting into running big UNIX boxes filled with do those things so not really effective for that but if you're running sis or NFS you can connect all kinds of desktops to it you can you know all the things that you know how to do you can do so choosing block storage or file system level search is really really question and at the end of the day you have a file server one way or another that's doing that work so at that point I'm just gonna let people ask questions now and they have prompt so I'm not sure if they're like falling asleep for has questions or yep yes okay actually what's funny is typically mass cost about 150 to 200 dollars and Sam starts at under a hundred it's and started close to 30 but it's not the same people think of they think of Santa thick the fan is actually a little one so the names are actually awful right network-attached storage and storage area network I hate these terms partially because they're confusing FRC because they're wrong storage area network is really just a term for block level storage and network attached storage is really just the name for filesystem level storage so when you're doing a block level you have to attach as a device and when you're doing filesystem level you have to have a special virtual file system driver like sis or NFS that allows you to put it onto the network and share it over the normal network the idea was Sam in theory the reason the word exists is because when they first did it with fiber channel fibre channel was its own thing you didn't communicate over fibre channel for other tasks so it was a storage area network but then later very quickly and actually at the time as well people would take nass devices file servers because we didn't call them NASA back then and put them on a dedicated network with its own switch connected to the servers on dedicated NICs just for storage well obviously that's a storage area network using Nass so that the terms can overlap even when you're doing dedicated networks so that's why I hate the terms but when we say Sam and we sometimes say San protocols doing Fiber Channel I scuzzy s CEO ata those things all right SC o Ethernet sorry and we use Nass to refer to the SIS NFS AFS today after that okay cool anything else before in the back yes a a SAN is like a LAN in that it is a network yes yep and I worked at a company that actually had what we called the D bat it was a database area network it was a dedicated network in the same way as her storage area network except it was dedicated to database communications so all the databases were on here Ethernet switch Ethernet service so who basically did the same thing really well so there was question up here I scuzzy is not as I'm aware any more noisy then I'm assuming they're there thinking it's broadcasting I'm not aware that there being any significant broadcast traffic unless they weren't running switched Ethernet which would be the bigger problem yeah it's um no it's it's really it's the it's DCP and it's non broadcast so it's point-to-point same as any any other for exalt that nature you know yeah it could be actually that's really good point so for a customer like that regardless of the noisiness of the protocol when you have traditional Sandpiper Channel will call traditional your network is obviously completely dedicated to that but what's highly recommended is if you're going to do I scuzzy or any other you know sand that leverages commodity networking as we like to say so Ethernet you want dedicated Hardware and dedicated network for that even so because it's it's not necessarily noisy but it is a really high volume traditionally I mean you wouldn't bother with it if it wasn't a certain life so you want to have switches that aren't doing anything but that in the same way you would have done a fiber channel just because you switch to I scuzzy from fiber channel doesn't mean that you should leverage your traditional land that's already existing to do so because you still have the same volume concern you just want to put it on a dedicated switch and treat it in the same manner which is nice because when we move to I scuzzy verses fiber channel you can't afford to go faster you can afford to have more redundancy you can get better switches keeper and quite often it's really really popular the more important something is Frank your shortage area networks the most important thing in your business it's really really common to jump straight to we need layer 3 switches we need lots and lots of management we need that the biggest less expensive things we can find the reality is you probably don't care that much about monitoring your surgery Network you might but most of the time you're actually gonna be better served getting a cheaper unmanaged switch because what you care about is latency and throughput and so the the less management there is the less layers there are the less that's going on you don't wanna be v landing on the switch that's handling your eyes Guzzi you want it to be its own not not virtual LAN you want to be a LAN if you need to be LAN get another switch and use it physically actually segmented because you don't want that overhead on your storage because your storage latency matters everything in your company so you want that to be as fast as possible and which is actually cheap that's the wonderful thing about speed on Ethernet pretty much the cheaper you get not consumer devices but with him within a given product range generally the cheaper they are the faster they are anyone else before going so you're talking about what where I said there there are file systems that allow you to do that commercial positive them okay I believe they're simply generally referred to as shared access file systems maybe someone actually knows what the generic term is for that family of but I do know that Red Hat and Oracle are the key players with that and I believe the Veritas with the XFS does that as well but I'm not a hundred percent sure I'm definitely not an expert on TX of that but GFS too is Red Hat's product so if you look up go to Red Hat look at GFS - I believe it's actually available for free from them but it's a dedicated these are file systems so anything that attaches to that with Sam has to have that file system driver so you have to look for a vendor that's gonna support whatever devices you're using but yep that's the big one but I don't work we'll have one - all right all right okay so a lot of people are familiar in the community we've talked about the Sam SP right the Sam St which I did not name is not an actual product but it is what I like to call a reference implementation of open storage and the reason that we came across with this is because in a lot of conversations we talked about with with companies and with people in community you know people want out well you want to put in the sand right so they go to a vendor everybody's gotta stay on these days they go to the vendor and they say well I need well you know I need block-level storage so they come out with really really expensive storage products and if you're a giant fortune 500 it probably makes sense because your storage devices right when I worked at the bank our storage devices are in the petabytes right they have entire data centers dedicated to the storage and we have an OSI 192 running to other facilities to carry those the fibre channel / - right so we can lose an entire data center our storage is still there and that sorta just replicated to another data center over OC 192 so unbelievable amounts of storage there's no way you're gonna go build this at home yourself that's where players like EMC Clarion come in and and Hitachi and build entire rooms that makes sense but when you're looking at more reasonable numbers of storage you start getting into the space where you're using traditional technologies completely including chassis so that's really what matters here so I'm gonna give a little story on this this is kind of the back story of how the Santa Fe came and came into being I work for where I'm a consultant for of a major fortune 10 it's hard to be a minor fortune-telling foot and they were doing a global commodity grid you can read about it online we're well known they were over 10,000 notes and we push an unbelievable amount of computing through that lots of different lines of businesses use it a lot of people like to call cloud it is not its high-performance grid computing it's very related to clouds that's not the same thing but we so it said it's an application layer virtualization not a operating system layer virtualization r500 realization so that's kind of where those government so we run several dozen and maybe a few score applications on this ten thousand note grid to be able to back that grid we don't have any storage on the nodes except for the operating system just makes it easy they boot locally but all their data comes in from somewhere else and then gets saved somewhere else we do cache locally just approximately on this we were working with we won't name names but a very very very major storage appliance member we had the second largest product that they made it costs really close to three hundred thousand dollars per unit we worked with them we brought up a new part of our grid and the load demand on the grid turned out to be higher than this device could supply not from a throughput necessarily actually from an eye off standpoint it just couldn't handle it with the spindles ahead and so we approached some vendors and at the time another vendor in the server space had brought out I guess I'll name it son had brought out what they called thumper which is a 48 drive for you server to processors 48 drives for you for you chassis it's a traditional chassis you go to your data center it looks like a regular for you server nothing weird it just has a lot of drive bays and they were pushing this as a sort of think of this in retro term let's go back to old storage stop thinking that they actually this is where the term open storage came from when they really suffer son said it is time to rethink storage storage devices that everyone's been buying Sanon ass are just servers that have lots and lots of drives attached to them well why not just buy a normal server and use that because when we make normal servers we can make lots of them faster than your price goes way way now when you buy sand and NASA labeled devices you tend to get products that are not sold on the same types of quantities as commodity servers and sometimes you use proprietary software to do some of the cool features and this drives the price through the roof they are also considered a non commodity so their margins are much higher the margins on a traditional server you're looking at the major players you know HP Dell whatever Dell does not make a thousand dollars off every server yourself is up they make twenty dollars right when you buy the time you get all the discounts done their margins are low so they're not ripping off on a server there it cost them a lot to deliver that to you so you want to be buying those devices if you can help it because that's where your value is coming from when you go to appliance size products you generally have to pay a lot for the main master the name sent and so so what Sun did something actually came in and worked with us and they knew they weren't getting this account but they worked with us anyway because they hated the other vendor we were competing against and and we said to them we we really feel that this this device that we have is very very expensive and doesn't seem to be doing as much as we could just do with a regular file server and son said absolutely a regular file server gives you all these advantages there's the commodity you can tune the operating system you can pick the operating system you can pick every component and you can do it much cheaper and they actually flew in the guy who invented ZFS to talk to us about it it was awesome and so we said well we went to the client and we said we would like to do an engineering study and we want the storage vendor involved I said ok they ordered the largest product that they made the largest mass device on the market there's a couple years ago so it's this figure now this was the it was a half million dollars and it was installed and tuned by the storage vendors own engineers they had a lot of money because we weren't buying one we're looking to buy like it doesn't so they brought in a lot of resources to make sure this was going to beat anything we could do we took two people from the engineering team with a couple hours we took a commodity server that we had now is it was a large server at the time it was a four-way Opteron box but it would be considered a small server today it's probably about 1/3 the processing capacity of what you would get for run for $5,000 today so still a decent server but and that's the time pretty impressive but nothing if we just fold it remember joint we loaded Red Hat Linux on it no tuning we got normal storage nothing special we set it up with NFS which is exactly how they were connecting to the other box and we did and before we ran it we projected what was going to happen that we knew there were threading issues on the processing side of the storage vendors product because it was not an open box and they could not update their operating system for the latest kernel which they needed to do because they weren't making their own operating system they were getting it for another vendor and they didn't have time to rework the operating system and we had the ability to run the latest Red Hat which had great threading support which was needed to be able to push the I office and when we ran it not only did our at the time $20,000.00 solution which cost about it was literally do you be able to put together for about two to three thousand today I expect not only do we outperform a half million dollar server turn tuned by their engineers but instead of flat telling and having them we actually have all the performance curves we have no idea what the capacity of the open scratch-built box was because we the grid could not request enough I off step pressure in the half-million-dollar device not only plateaued but when it went on the plateau for very long it actually shut down so the the potential savings here were not just millions of dollars of purchasing but that this product met the need while this product did not it was easier for us to manage because we didn't have to have dedicated storage people we use the skill set we already had we already have the engineers for this will just manage it along with all the other servers it will look exactly like all the other services so this experience and for those who wonder no they didn't go with that they went with the expensive solution in the project help the welcome to the fortune 10 so what that prompted was later when when Niagara started looking at storage options and we started having a lot of conversations in the community about how do you do storage how do you make it cost-effective what do you do when you have all these needs and needs flexibility and I can't afford these other products oh we looked at the product market and we said wow you know you go to any major server vendor right ones that are here ones that aren't anyone who's a top-tier vendor and they have these chassis that are very affordable that have a lot of space for desks some have more than others some have different price points but they're all relatively affordable and powerful stable and manageable and they fit into your infrastructure just like everything else you can go get third-party disks for them some support that a little bit better than others but most of them have complete open support for any gift you want into it you can put lots of disks into them you control their speed you control their configuration to control the models if you have a specific drive vendor that you're very very comfortable with you can pick them to get you all that and you're building systems for a few thousand dollars that not only might outperform a 30 or 40 or $100,000 commercial appliance eyes sand or nest device but you also have more control over it you have the event this is the most important thing with any computing device remember it's just a server there's no magic right everybody thinks well I'm gonna get its and I can let everything else fails cuz the sand won't fail but the sand is just a server like everything else right there are better ones they're cheaper ones but it's just a server right it's always subject to the forklift risk right but someone's gonna drive the forklift into that one box and it just absolutely happens right from some real example and so when you cut the cost dramatically when $30,000 was it was a consideration but now you can do the same thing for $5,000 don't cut your budget by $25,000 cut your budget by $20,000 and get two of those and now you can now they can you can use them in the same way you do with anything we're done and that doesn't have to be on a scale - it could be on a scale of 50 right you were gonna buy 50 or 25 commercial sands now buy 50 of these and build things and that's that's an option when you get really really big right it starts to maybe not make sense really large sands have capacity to put lots more drives and and they're much more manageable and on a really massive scale so if there are price points and there are feature points where traditional sands start to make a lot of sense but they almost never do when you're in a capacity range where you are working with a single traditional commodity server chassis capacity as a lot of ways basically if you have a normal server you can buy off-the-shelf from your preferred vendor wherever you're working with now and once you're working with some white box builder and then stop and go get it enterprise bender either if you're dealing with an enterprise vendor go to them get their price for the chassis that makes sense it's almost always a to you I know Dell is here and they've got a box that holds 24 2.5 inch drives in a to you right pretty unbelievable if it's 24 2.5 inch drives meets your needs you've got all that storage and that it's that's potentially really fast sure well before I answer that exact question because this actually came up last night almost exactly the same thing right so when I talk about storage I often talk about Red Hat because that's how we do storage which is not actually true we do a little bit of Red Hat most of our storage is actually solaris cousins that are io throughput but in either those cases you're dealing with an operating system that chances are the majority of you whether that's 51 percent or 80 percent I don't know but most people in this community are not unix proficient it's not part of your infrastructure it's not something you manage on a daily basis if it is it's definitely consideration but if it's not it doesn't matter because Windows is an absolutely wonderful storage platform in the same way that UNIX is and it's just in this example is that we ran UNIX because that's that's what we did were for doing administration windows make some really powerful storage stuff they do I scuzzy they do cess they do NFS it's all free it's all included you're not buying extra products and they're sips if you're doing Active Directory Integration it's by far the easiest to deal with works the best most reliable but if you don't want to go with Windows as your storage and you want to go with someone like Red Hat as an example you have lots of options even if you don't have the in-house expertise there are lots of MSPs who will do that obviously pretty much you can always find an atmosphere do something for you know what someone killed you find it but there really are your storage devices are something that need relatively little monitoring they need monitoring but you're not you're probably not concerned with you know capacity planning other than the amount of storage and you can watch that right Spiceworks will monitor it and tell you how much it's being used so as long as you're dealing with that kind of stuff you're probably not dealing with in a normal small business situation you know CPU capacity memory capacity you've got more than enough in the smallest box that those dozen companies like Red Hat if you actually get Red Hat commercially you will get support from Red Hat themselves right or if you're getting Susa from Novell they don't sell in the same way that Windows does Windows is based on a license and the commercial Linux players are based on support contracts so that support is okay or those I know a lot of people in here like I'm going to canonical the exact same thing for free play with it and when you're ready to go live you can contact canonical and yet torsional support directly comes em as a primary vendor or to any number of msps who would provide that support and of course you get training anything else that's your question okay I do have opinions on them I have run across them um I don't like their pricing structure I feel that their they are hurting themselves in that way I think they should have a free version that is more scalable but as a product based on open Solaris if it fits into your price range and it's not that expensive right it's a very if you're looking at this range of stuff this is I think it's a really good product I have not used it in the commercial capacity so there may be some gotcha so I'm not familiar with but the underlying technology it is open Solaris is awesome right lots and lots of power lots and lots of flexibility lots of options and very easy to manage and that's something I should mention is the attenti is a it's a NASA appliance right I can't believe I forgot some ends of it so we have traditional servers file services just you know windows a red hat or Solaris whatever and you're doing everything and then we have the appliance that's right you can go to neck here you can go to Buffalo you go to Drobo you can go to EMC and ecologic and HP everybody right everybody has these full appliances but there's also a middle ground or you're using the hardware like the commodity hardware from anybody and then applying the operating system that is a appliance operating system so next enta is a great example of that it's one that's built on open Solaris 3 NASA is the same type of thing completely free built on FreeBSD and open filer is the same thing that built on connery Linux which unfortunately is a very unpopular version of Linux and it's not monitored by anything and the valve management stuff is funky so that's unfortunate but and there is a fourth player and I can't remember their name he's definitely the small tear in that left hand from HP used to be one of those players and when they got bought by HP they kind of two combined hardware so they kind of moved into that side instead of being in the software space so but for people who want to work with Linux and don't want to work with Linux or want to look at BSD and don't know what the BSD those solutions give you those operating systems with those operating systems advantages and disadvantages without having to know those operating systems and one actual caveat to mention is if you're gonna work with open file are very powerful it is the best for replication of any product along with all the big commercial ones this replication is phenomenal but there's no interface for it you are you will need a senior Linux admin fees to do that with freedom the only couple hours we are in officially in the QA I think we have five minutes I need five minutes of questions ready now well so full disclosure company I work for is a partner with Netgear so we have to say we'd love ready now but we love ready now definitely it my personal preferences if you're gonna be working in the space where you want an appliance mask and you you know you want all the I just want to buy it right I don't want to be ready NASA's a really really great product is based on Linux it does not have dr BD replication we are pushing them for that that doesn't mean they'll do it but we have pushed for other things we are doing it so there are some caveats with readiness and I'm not allowed to tell you but so I'm not gonna mention what the caveat are but I can tell you since I didn't tell you what they are that they're going away in December so readiness it's a great product and we've priced it versus building a Sam st and it's within like 10 percent of cost and there is someone on my team who runs one and was it yes I'm sorry Don I have I don't have experience on it so I'm I can't really compare it to anything unfortunately can't really answer that very well uh-huh that if you're getting the 24 bay from from Dell the 2.5 inch chances are if you're buying that unit it's because you want 15 K drives chances are just because you selected that chassis that's like why that chassis exists you don't have to when you're choosing both your your raid levels right and everybody knows but mostly you know probably that I absolutely hate raid 5 but the reality is if you're in a archival situation and it's not a live system and it's backed up and all you want it to be is online most of time and you're willing to take a little bit higher risk raid 5 can save you a lot of money I would not use it for online systems but I would use it for Nearline which is kind of a lot of small businesses don't do near line storage so but when it comes to actually selecting your spindles it's really a question of price and versus I ops right and so if you know if you're gonna go with SATA you just have to have more of them but they cost less so that could be very beneficial and typically you're gonna get more storage while you do it so you might be like oh here's the option for SAS at 15k here's the option for SATA at 7.2 K and at the price point where it gives you the performance you need this one likely is gonna give you 2 or 10 times the actual storage capacity that might be a winner but it also might be so many doesn't fit in the chassis you want to get and there's a little looser so and as you have more drives they are more likely to fail right just 20 drives are more likely to fail them - so there are risks there but just doing a calculation of performance is really the only the only factor there there's no there's no guaranteed thing and a lot of commercial Santa nests are only SATA because they just add more of them well so with raid5 compared to and it's not just right by the way it's called the r8f family which is right two three four five and six they use what's known as a soar calculation and what that does is there's obviously a stripe across the disks and you get great capacity out of it and that's why it was is why they spent the effort to invent it the way that that works is the rate controller has to do whether it's software hardware has to do a lot of work to make that stripe work and because of that the rate controller becomes a significant point of failure compared to rate an array one which doesn't have as or calculation so the risk that you get beyond performance issues the sort calculation causes performance issues additionally but performance is a arguable point right do you care about performance do you not care about performance but losing your data everyone cares about and I have had first hand which will really convince you but I also know other companies who have had raid controller failure on a raid F array node rise fail everything lost because the RAID controller freaked out and has a destructive operations where it destroys all the disks great one and rate ten do not have a destruction operation to perform on the disks well they do a rebuild it is a mirror if they were to mirror a good disk it would build a new healthy disk but if a raid 5 attempts to rebuild an unhealthy system it will destroy a healthy one and so if raid F fails its action in failing is to scrap everything and I've seen I have definitely seen that firsthand caused by chassis shudder in a in a data center it was a server that was in use for years drives came in and out of contact over we're not there's a period of minutes or a period of hours it kicked off multiple rebuild operations and one of them just posed tire array so when we found it they had all receded themselves and we had six healthy discs to help you rate controller and no data I think we're at it and we're done
• 

  Changes at Sangoma
  freepbx sangoma • • JaredBusch  

  13
  0
  Votes
  13
  Posts
  263
  Views

  

  Okay, if you want to talk storage, it's over here: https://mangolassi.it/topic/19657/revisiting-zfs-and-freenas-in-2019
• 

  What is ZRAID and Is It Related to ZFS
  raid zfs raidz xraid • • scottalanmiller  

  1
  0
  Votes
  1
  Posts
  31
  Views

  No one has replied

• 

  UNSOLVED Create network share for Java?
  • IRJ  

  4
  3
  Votes
  4
  Posts
  63
  Views

  

  Seems like any mapped drive would work. I don't think it's a special share of some sort.
• 

  Comparing MeshCentral 2 to ScreenConnect
  screenconnect remote access meshcentral meshcentral 2 connectwise connectwise control • • scottalanmiller  

  766
  5
  Votes
  766
  Posts
  9482
  Views

  

  @Ylian said in Comparing MeshCentral 2 to ScreenConnect: What is the "correct" alternative to MongoDB on Fedora? Maybe I can build a different database binding... There is none, no document database is included with Fedora now.
• 

  Where Does oVirt Make Sense
  virtualization kvm ovirt rhv • • scottalanmiller  

  1
  1
  Votes
  1
  Posts
  40
  Views

  No one has replied

• 

  Testing oVirt...
  kvm hyperconverged supermicro centos7 ovirt gluster red hat virtualization • • FATeknollogee  

  313
  1
  Votes
  313
  Posts
  8745
  Views

  

  @Obsolesce said in Testing oVirt...: Odd. I got it up and running very easily not very long ago. getting it up and running isn't hard. Getting it up and running in a disparate, broad, centrally managed way is hard. That's basically my point over and over - if you use it in one very specific way it's easy and does a great job (isolated, HA-focused, low performance clusters) and if you use it in any other way (enterprise multi-purpose workloads or similar) it doesn't work well. Now it's stated that it's not meant to work that way, and that's fine, but it's also pushed for those cases, when obviously it shouldn't. Basically, you can see that lots of people see it as a pet project and want to promote it for everything, and act like you need to change your entire business to fit around oVirt, rather than having a tool that fits around real world workload needs. If oVirt was promoted more clearly for very niche use cases, it would not come across the same way. Here is the stated case: "oVirt is an open-source distributed virtualization solution, designed to manage your entire enterprise infrastructure." Obviously, as people have pointed out, this is total crap. It's meant only for very niche workloads within any large business, and only for extremely isolated small businesses for whom all workloads fit into that niche. The issue isn't oVirt as a techology, but oVirt as it is being promoted. It seems a lot like FreeNAS, but not quite as bad. basically a big cult following that are pushing it recklessly by ignoring the use cases and acting like it's a magic box that fixes all needs like it's not a real world system or something. FreeNAS always overstates its case, in the real world, it's essentially useless. oVirt seems way better than that, but nowhere near the universal tool it promotes itself, and others promote it as being.
• C

  Can’t Access Netdata
  • Curtis  

  6
  0
  Votes
  6
  Posts
  42
  Views

  

  I could tell you the file name but I am on my phone at the graduation.
• 

  Linux: Installing and Configuring an NFS Server
  linux centos fedora unix sam linux administration nfs • • scottalanmiller  

  9
  4
  Votes
  9
  Posts
  231
  Views

  

  @scottalanmiller At least with Fedora 30, its nfs-utils instead of nfs-util
• 

  Video Conferencing Hardware - Suggestions?
  hardware video conference slack video conference conference room webcam meeting • • wrx7m  

  14
  1
  Votes
  14
  Posts
  154
  Views

  

  @wrx7m said in Video Conferencing Hardware - Suggestions?: @scottalanmiller said in Video Conferencing Hardware - Suggestions?: I'm doing video conferencing stuff this week, too! What are you deploying? I am leaning toward the higher end logitech stuff to integrate with SFB/Teams and Slack. If I do that, I will most likely pull the trigger on the Barco CSE-200+ for wireless presentation- something we haven't had before. We have just had a direct HDMI cable to a large monitor. Cheap Logitech right now to get started. We are talking to Yealink to find out about their high end stuff. But likely we are going to go with just Logitech gear and maybe soft phones or something like that.
• 

  Outlook File is in use and cannot be accessed
  email outlook ms office pst scanpst • • scottalanmiller  

  4
  0
  Votes
  4
  Posts
  33
  Views

  

  I know SFB accesses the ost file.
• 

  Passing OpenVPN through ER-X
  openvpn er-x • • Dashrender  

  27
  0
  Votes
  27
  Posts
  86
  Views

  

  @wrx7m said in Passing OpenVPN through ER-X: @scottalanmiller said in Passing OpenVPN through ER-X: I can't find any references to OpenVPN using 943/TCP. You sure that that isn't a custom setting somewhere? https://openvpn.net/vpn-server-resources/how-to-configure-the-openvpn-access-server/ It must just be access server. "TCP port 943 is the port where the web server interface is listening by default." Yeah, no web server in OpenVPN itself.
• 

  When Anti-Virus Companies Get Hacked: Symantec, Trend Micro, and Intel McAfee
  intel antivirus breach symantec hacked av mcafee trend micro • • WrCombs  

  10
  0
  Votes
  10
  Posts
  104
  Views

  

  @Dashrender said in When Anti-Virus Companies Get Hacked: Symantec, Trend Micro, and Intel McAfee: I can't recall if the bad ccleaner was signed or not? Even if it was, that would be a Microsoft compromise. This is about the AV vendors getting hacked.
• P

  Ubuntu 19.04 upgraded from 18.10 - Meshcentral not redirecting port 80
  lets encrypt meshcentral ubuntu 19.04 port 80 • • pmoncho  

  38
  0
  Votes
  38
  Posts
  73
  Views

  

  @scottalanmiller said in Ubuntu 19.04 upgraded from 18.10 - Meshcentral not redirecting port 80: @pmoncho said in Ubuntu 19.04 upgraded from 18.10 - Meshcentral not redirecting port 80: @scottalanmiller said in Ubuntu 19.04 upgraded from 18.10 - Meshcentral not redirecting port 80: @pmoncho said in Ubuntu 19.04 upgraded from 18.10 - Meshcentral not redirecting port 80: I would need to move it outside of home dir to something like /opt? Should, of course. No software ever goes in the /home directory. But need to? No, root can use any directory. Will work on this. Thanks If you are using NeDB, it is super simple to move the data file. If you are using MongoDB, the database is always still there on the same port. Until MongoDB is gone!
• 

  Windows 10 goes to sleep outside listed sleep times
  windows 10 dashrender sleep power management • • Dashrender  

  12
  3
  Votes
  12
  Posts
  607
  Views

  

  I figure I owe an update here. These reg entries are in hex... 00000078 = 120 in decimal. i.e. 2 mins.. sigh I completely over looked this. No wonder the times weren't changing.
• N

  SOLVED VPN File Transfer Problems
  • notverypunny  

  34
  0
  Votes
  34
  Posts
  247
  Views

  

  @scottalanmiller said in VPN File Transfer Problems: @JaredBusch said in VPN File Transfer Problems: Contracts don't mean shit. You can always cancel. So what if you have to pay out some portion of the remaining contract (even 100%). This is a specific case of the general case "sunk cost fallacy". What Jared is pointing out is that we tend to see a cost already spent (or already committed to) as being a lock in for that vendor or service. But even when that still exists, it's all still just math and in the long run, we often miss financial opportunity because we assume that money already spent is better than money saved in the future. I've cancelled a $13k T1 service less than a week after it was turned up because coax became available. FYI, Charter can KMA for not telling me they were building out when I asked. Because they certainly had to know it. But still, client didn't care. they cancelled it. Sucked to eat the cancellation fees. But 1.5/1.5 versus 80/10? When this was a remote branch office that needed to use everything via RDP and shares across the VPN? Yup cancelled. Edit: This also enabled the ability to add them to the hosted PBX system, so their other telecom costs dropped by losing POTS lines, and also interoffice calling went to free. See how nothing works in a bubble? Edit 2: This was before I met @Phil-CommQuotes.. So much better now that I don't have to deal with this.