Should We Ever Talk About JBODs
-
@scottalanmiller said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
@Tim_G said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
Going word-by-word, yes, the above is just a bunch of disks. For sure. That is what it is. But it's useless like that.
What a JBOD is in IT terms, is a JBOD enclosure specifically. When you refer to a JBOD, you are referring something like Microsoft links to or one of those DataON JBOD storage enclosures.
But we have a term for that, too. A disk enclosure. Even in the MS working they have to say JBOD Enclosure. If JBOD means enclosure, then they are saying "enclosure enclosure" which would be a rack of enclosures or something. Clearly MS is not clear internally as to what it means. Is JBOD the disks or the enclosure? They go back and forth.
Which is my point. Microsoft is the best possible reference - if they can't figure it out, can't agree with themselves and don't even come close to agreeing with Wikipedia, common usage or common sense... obviously the term doesn't have a place in IT. There is simply never a time that using the term is meaningful or useful. It never clarifies and it never provides additional information. It is, at best, confusing and redundant.
Microsoft is using the term "JBOD". They only add the word "enclosure" depending on the context. It appears that way to me anyways.
For example, "SAS connected JBODs that comply with Windows Certification requirements"
vs.
"These HBAs are connected to all JBOD enclosures in the file server cluster, and can’t have built-in RAID functionality."Example, "RAID adapters, if used, must have all RAID functionality disabled and must not obscure any attached devices, including enclosure services provided by an attached JBOD."
vs.
"Serial ATA (SATA) or Serial Attached SCSI (SAS) connected disks, optionally in a just-a-bunch-of-disks (JBOD) enclosure"Or here, where they use both in the same sentence! "Enough JBOD enclosures to tolerate an entire JBOD failing or becoming disconnected"
Every time in Microsoft documentation they use the word JBOD, it's used correctly that I've seen. It's used to mean one thing, always. It's never used to mean anything other than this: http://dataonstorage.com/dns-jbod-enclosure/dns-2608-4u-32-bay-12gbps-sas-enterprise-jbod-storage-enclosure.html
-
@scottalanmiller
I'm familiar with JBOD as just a random collection of drives with no logical filter between them and the host.Now RAIN -- I have to admit to having never heard this term outside of weather. I'm not exactly a newb in the realm of computing, so I'm wondering which terminology silo it came from.
-
@Tim_G said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
Every time in Microsoft documentation they use the word JBOD, it's used correctly that I've seen. It's used to mean one thing, always. It's never used to mean anything other than this: http://dataonstorage.com/dns-jbod-enclosure/dns-2608-4u-32-bay-12gbps-sas-enterprise-jbod-storage-enclosure.html
Is it? So with SS for example, it won't function with actual JBODs, but only JBOD enclosures? There is no way to use it with local disks? How does it know?
-
@AmishBIll said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
Now RAIN -- I have to admit to having never heard this term outside of weather. I'm not exactly a newb in the realm of computing, so I'm wondering which terminology silo it came from.
It came from the RAID world once systems moved past traditional RAID.
-
Okay, what about this view...
What would you have called this before the term JBOD?: http://dataonstorage.com/dns-jbod-enclosure/dns-2608-4u-32-bay-12gbps-sas-enterprise-jbod-storage-enclosure.html
If you say "disk enclosure", then you can't use that as easily as JBOD. Because a disk enclosure can contain a bunch of disks that are already raided by some means. Therefore, you can't say just disk enclosure. JBOD specifically implies a disk enclosure that is not raided by anything.
-
@Tim_G said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
Every time in Microsoft documentation they use the word JBOD, it's used correctly that I've seen.
They defined JBOD in one document as always having redundant controllers and power supplies. I believe that alone means that they're not sticking to anyone's agreed concept of "correct".
-
@Tim_G said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
Okay, what about this view...
What would you have called this before the term JBOD?: http://dataonstorage.com/dns-jbod-enclosure/dns-2608-4u-32-bay-12gbps-sas-enterprise-jbod-storage-enclosure.html
If you say "disk enclosure", then you can't use that as easily as JBOD. Because a disk enclosure can contain a bunch of disks that are already raided by some means. Therefore, you can't say just disk enclosure. JBOD specifically implies a disk enclosure that is not raided by anything.
But a JBOD enclosure can have RAID added to it. So I don't see how that clarifies anything. A RAID enclosure is used to tell us that there is RAID. Disk enclosure to tell us that it is an enclosure of disks, like JBOD. A disk enclosure / JBOD can always have RAID and, it is assumed, will always have something at least RAID-like.
-
@Tim_G said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
Okay, what about this view...
What would you have called this before the term JBOD?: http://dataonstorage.com/dns-jbod-enclosure/dns-2608-4u-32-bay-12gbps-sas-enterprise-jbod-storage-enclosure.html
If you say "disk enclosure", then you can't use that as easily as JBOD. Because a disk enclosure can contain a bunch of disks that are already raided by some means. Therefore, you can't say just disk enclosure. JBOD specifically implies a disk enclosure that is not raided by anything.
And what happens the moment you apply RAID or something else to it? Is it suddenly no longer JBOD?
-
@Tim_G said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
... Because a disk enclosure can contain a bunch of disks that are already raided by some means.
If you're supplied something that already has some means of RAID applied at the box level, I personally wouldn't call that a simple disk enclosure. It's now an appliance, not a disk enclosure.
-
@Dashrender said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
@Tim_G said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
Okay, what about this view...
What would you have called this before the term JBOD?: http://dataonstorage.com/dns-jbod-enclosure/dns-2608-4u-32-bay-12gbps-sas-enterprise-jbod-storage-enclosure.html
If you say "disk enclosure", then you can't use that as easily as JBOD. Because a disk enclosure can contain a bunch of disks that are already raided by some means. Therefore, you can't say just disk enclosure. JBOD specifically implies a disk enclosure that is not raided by anything.
And what happens the moment you apply RAID or something else to it? Is it suddenly no longer JBOD?
That's the problem, it gets confusing at that point.
-
@Dashrender said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
@Tim_G said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
... Because a disk enclosure can contain a bunch of disks that are already raided by some means.
If you're supplied something that already has some means of RAID applied at the box level, I personally wouldn't call that a simple disk enclosure. It's now an appliance, not a disk enclosure.
Right, I can't think of any case where disk enclosure != JBOD enclosure. I guess if we are referring to many enclosures of varying types? Maybe?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
@Tim_G said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
Every time in Microsoft documentation they use the word JBOD, it's used correctly that I've seen. It's used to mean one thing, always. It's never used to mean anything other than this: http://dataonstorage.com/dns-jbod-enclosure/dns-2608-4u-32-bay-12gbps-sas-enterprise-jbod-storage-enclosure.html
Is it? So with SS for example, it won't function with actual JBODs, but only JBOD enclosures? There is no way to use it with local disks? How does it know?
It's all in the context of which it's being used. I've never seen JBOD used officially, in a context that doesn't imply a JBOD enclosure.
I suppose you could say, "set up your servers internal storage in a JBOD configuration". Or you could say "hook up your server to a JBOD". Or even "I just dropped my JBOD enclosure"
Honestly, all are correct, and I don't see any issue what so ever with any. It doesn't make me any less knowledgeable or show that I can't do my job less well than someone else who avoids the term.
-
I guess one of the things for me is, I've never used the term and have not lacked for expressive terminology. And it isn't like I don't have to talk about disks on a regular basis.
-
@Tim_G said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
It's all in the context of which it's being used. I've never seen JBOD used officially, in a context that doesn't imply a JBOD enclosure.
I take that back. I have in a "configuration" sense.
-
For example, I don't consider DROBO a disk enclosure, it's an appliance. The device itself applies whatever RAID level I want to the disks, then there is an interface to that storage (either block level or share level).
-
@Tim_G said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
Honestly, all are correct, and I don't see any issue what so ever with any. It doesn't make me any less knowledgeable or show that I can't do my job less well than someone else who avoids the term.
The problem is, and we've proven this I feel beyond any doubt, is that if you use the term you are no longer able to reliable convey your meaning to other IT pros. Certainly not ones in this thread, ML, SW or at MS. All of them have differing, conflicting ideas from how you just used it.
The majority of "JBOD discussions" if you will, that I have seen, involve "just a bunch of disks" in a server, not in an enclosure. So the majority that I see would find this conversation very confusing because they are using the accepted Wikipedia definition, not the one that implies an enclosure.
-
@Tim_G said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
@Tim_G said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
It's all in the context of which it's being used. I've never seen JBOD used officially, in a context that doesn't imply a JBOD enclosure.
I take that back. I have in a "configuration" sense.
I've seen it in a requirement sense.
-
@Tim_G said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
It's all in the context of which it's being used. I've never seen JBOD used officially, in a context that doesn't imply a JBOD enclosure.
As just a random phrase with no official product or sponsor, I'm not sure any use is more or less official than any other. Wikipedia would be the closest to official that you could get, or maybe the OED if they covered that sort of thing.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
@Tim_G said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
@Tim_G said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
It's all in the context of which it's being used. I've never seen JBOD used officially, in a context that doesn't imply a JBOD enclosure.
I take that back. I have in a "configuration" sense.
I've seen it in a requirement sense.
LOL - so the people who required JBOD didn't care about their data I take it?
-
@Dashrender said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
@scottalanmiller said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
@Tim_G said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
@Tim_G said in Should We Ever Talk About JBODs:
It's all in the context of which it's being used. I've never seen JBOD used officially, in a context that doesn't imply a JBOD enclosure.
I take that back. I have in a "configuration" sense.
I've seen it in a requirement sense.
LOL - so the people who required JBOD didn't care about their data I take it?
Microsoft lists it as a requirement.
