@scottalanmiller said in Should I bother to learn Windows Storage Spaces and what about Glances export?:

@PhlipElder said in Should I bother to learn Windows Storage Spaces and what about Glances export?:

@scottalanmiller said in Should I bother to learn Windows Storage Spaces and what about Glances export?:

@PhlipElder said in Should I bother to learn Windows Storage Spaces and what about Glances export?:

HCI or disaggregate with Hyper-V and SOFS S2D are they way we're deploying now. So, the whole conversation is essentially moot.

Not really HCI as described with the DataOn. That's just a software RAID version of the non-HC model.

HC has always meant physical convergence.

I believe I referred to the DataON setup as "Converged" or sometimes "Asymmetric" not Hyper-Converged which is what Storage Spaces Direct is when running with both Storage Spaces and Hyper-V on the nodes.

I see. Asymmetric is a decent term. What about it is converged, though? It seems "unconverged", if you will. Other than the software RAID running on the storage nodes.

"Converged" in this case refers to both Hyper-V and Storage Spaces running on the nodes to provide virtual machine and storage cluster based arbitration.

@DustinB3403 said in Nextcloud Backup System Idea:

Practicing process also requires that you practice developing process and having holes punched into said idea.

Yep. And you've validated some holes I've considered, but didn't explicitly write in my posts.

@Emad-R IOPS varies wildly by how it is tested. The question for your Windows tests would be... how was it tested? We know how the Linux was tested, it tells us. Knowing how the Windows was tested is the real need at this point.

@jaredbusch Right. The datastores are at the hypervisor level. The vmdks would be on respective datastores and then in the VM, they would be also be shown as separate disks.

@scottalanmiller said in Battery Backup with SSD raid:

@pete-s said in Battery Backup with SSD raid:

@scottalanmiller said in Battery Backup with SSD raid:

@pete-s said in Battery Backup with SSD raid:

@scottalanmiller said in Battery Backup with SSD raid:

SSD NV protection is to allow the SSD's cache to flush safely should power be lost. RAID NV / battery protection is to allow the RAID's cache to flush safely should power be lost. Each is important on its own, neither covers for the other one.

That's technically slightly incorrect.

The non-volatile cache memory on the raid controller is to be preserve the data that has not yet been written to the drives, until power is restored again.

On the SSD the capacitors hold enough charge so that the drive can write the remaining data in the cache memory to the actual flash memory after the power is gone. The cache is DRAM so it will loose it's contents after a few seconds.

The only time details like this matter is if you remove the battery from a raid card, your data might be lost.

I'm missing how that is different than what I said. What you said is correct, but I feel like you just reworded what I said, with the added detail that the RAID card flush is not until power is restored, which one hopes is obvious.

Sorry Scott, you're right. I was just thrown off by you said "SSD NV protection" and because you worded both thing the same. Obviously both things are to protect from data loss at power failures.

OIC, you are saying that the SSD is volatile, but has a battery in most cases? makes sense.

Almost, let me explain. Below is a picture of an Samsung enterprise SSD, SM863.

The SSD controller (yellow) is the brain. The flash memory (green cross) is non-volatile so it will not suffer data loss without power. There are also more flash memory on the backside.

The cache memory however is the blue ring and it will lose it's memory as soon as the power is removed. It's the same type as the memory in your computer, DRAM. That would cause immediate data loss and that is not good and that is why enterprise drives have a lot of capacitors (red circles).

The capacitors (red) act like small rechargeable batteries. When the drive loses it's external power these small capacitors will work as a reserve power for the entire drive. The controller (yellow) knows that it has lost external power so it will quickly write the data from the cache memory (blue) to the flash memory (green) before the reserve power from the capacitors (red) are empty. That way data loss is prevented. This will only take a couple of seconds at most.

0_1538765396271_samsung_ssd.png

@travisdh1 I thought that was the issue as well and temporarily disabled selinux and it did not fix my issue.

@wirestyle22 said in NextCloud Check In and Check Out:

I thought there was a collaboration app that handled this but I can't find it

A collaboration app can't do this. At best it can do it for a specific case, but not the general one. There is no collaboration product for any platform that can do that.

@travisdh1 said in Backup Systems without on-site external storage:

@scottalanmiller said in Backup Systems without on-site external storage:

@black3dynamite said in Backup Systems without on-site external storage:

@scottalanmiller said in Backup Systems without on-site external storage:

@black3dynamite said in Backup Systems without on-site external storage:

@obsolesce said in Backup Systems without on-site external storage:

I've recently come across Restic and looks great:

Site:
https://github.com/restic/restic

Documentation:
https://restic.readthedocs.io/en/latest/

I haven't tried it yet, but it's on my list to try on my KVM server using Google's cloud as a test.

I’ve only tested it with backing up nextcloud user data and it’s been working great so far.

What are you backing up to?

I only tried an external hard drive and sftp to a Linux Server. I would like to try Backblaze.

I would like to check out Wasabi.

At first glance, https://wasabi.com/pricing/ looks like it could be a little cheaper than B2. Would definitely be cheaper if you need to download significant amounts often.

That was its selling point - a bit cheaper than even B2, but with full S3 compatibility.

@scottalanmiller said in Find Source of Windows Mapped Drives:

@jaredbusch said in Find Source of Windows Mapped Drives:

Doing @powershell, you probably need to handle escaping quotes or something is all.

Likely

https://docs.connectwise.com/ConnectWise_Control_Documentation/Get_started/Host_page/Run_a_command_from_the_Host_page#Use_Powershell

@obsolesce said in Does Dell not offer low cost HW RAID anymore?:

@dbeato said in Does Dell not offer low cost HW RAID anymore?:

@obsolesce said in Does Dell not offer low cost HW RAID anymore?:

@dbeato said in Does Dell not offer low cost HW RAID anymore?:

@obsolesce said in Does Dell not offer low cost HW RAID anymore?:

@dbeato said in Does Dell not offer low cost HW RAID anymore?:

Plus MD1000 are for older SANs...

eh? It's just extending the internal storage... externally, hence "DAS". It has tons of use cases.

It does, but they MD1000s were mainly setup for SAN devices in mind. Yeah they can also be attached to servers as well which is not bad either. Just not my preference, nothing wrong with that.

Not sure what you mean, a DAS is a DAS... MD1000, MD3000, MD1200, MD1400... whatever. They are simply (as what Dell calls them, @scottalanmiller , not me) "Server JBOD Expansions". They aren't specific to SAN use and are not SANs.

Okay, I am not trying to go in a tangent and go in argument with you. Why does it need to be this way?
Reason for me saying that mainly Dell uses it for SANs see below:
https://www.dell.com/en-us/work/shop/povw/powervault-md1000

You still can use them for servers for user.

No arguing or disagreeing... I'm just not understanding where you're getting "SAN" from?

0_1529507862093_2018-06-20_11-17-09.png

Yeah after my limited experience with this, not sure I would ever trust using a non-DELL drive.

At least on a production system.

Here is a good example of why this is complex even for blind swap hardware RAID... it's not always clear what it is supposed to do.

https://mangolassi.it/topic/17314/replaced-drive-in-pe-t410-not-adding-to-virtual-disk/

@travisdh1 said in Storage Setup for KVM:

@emad-r said in Storage Setup for KVM:

@eddiejennings

keep your images and ISOs in the default location of /var/lib/libvirt/images/?

Yes I do, but I create 2 new folders there, iso and vm.

Fedora will be presented a 4 TB block device ?
Why dont you separe that a little, and have more fun. Block device I assume DAS, if no why dont you make the storage reliable and robust, and make it its own server, like another fedora or centos install, with RAID 10 and the simplest option to share is NFS, and this way you can have many KVMs and the migration feature will actually work, and you can do RAID on just /var, and you scan scale easily with KVM nodes + KVM nodes can be state file, think salt stack, and you can treat them as pure compute nodes.

Because @EddieJennings is talking about his home lab, which will consist of a single 1U server. That hadn't been mentioned in this thread.

Bah! Folks should be able to read my mind ;). There were some good ideas in this thread though.

What I decided on was giving enough space to / live comfortably, and gave everything else to /var.

@fuznutz04 said in Backup server comparison:

@black3dynamite Ah yes, SLAT. Almost forgot about that. I ran into that trying to install HV 2016 on a REALLY old box for testing. I could install it, but that's where the story ended.

If I get the E5620 or higher in the Xeon family, I think I should be fine. I know for sure that the E5620 works. I have them in my R710.

The same thing happened to me. So it made my decision to use KVM even easier for what I was using the server for.

@scottalanmiller said in Seagate Shows Off World's Fastest Hard Drive:

That's true, we are definitely getting to the point where we need faster ways to get data on and off of all drives.

For sure, the data processing boards need a change too.

Maybe they just weren't ready for production yet.