The Textbook Things Gone Wrong in IT Thread
-
@DustinB3403 said:
Scott what chassis and drives were you looking at, I can't find anything under $4000 grand all in.
R630 chassis was like $1400 from xByte and the drives were...
Oh you are right, I was accidentally thinking only three of these drives when calculating the price.
-
Probably the R620, sorry.
You could trim on the chassis a bit, but there is only so much to save, having a high end recent model is probably worth the little extra money.
-
I'm assuming you went with five 2TB drives from Amazon in RAID 5 would would give me 8TB usable.
Correct?
-
Four, giving you six, is what I had intended.
-
4 bay or 8 bay chassis?
-
Either works. Four bay is all you would need for 6TB usable.
-
All in, with 16GB of Memory and Dual Xeon at 1.8 GHz with 4 of the drives the price for this unit would be $4190.96
We'd then have to move all of our data over to it, remap our shares, and have our backup appliance backup a single server...
Doesn't seem horrible. But how does one move 4TB of data (from different servers) all to one server?
-
@DustinB3403 said:
All in, with 16GB of Memory and Dual Xeon at 1.8 GHz with 4 of the drives the price for this unit would be $4190.96
Yeah, that's some crazy CPU and memory overkill for storage so small. But so cheap, why get less.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
I can't possibly state how bad of an idea it is to have an external enclosure for this BUT I could, just for hypothetical cases, build a 6TB pure SSD NAS, rackmount, full enterprise server chassis.... $3,400. I literally just priced out the drives and server for it.
what drives are you using? and what RAID level?
-
@DustinB3403 said:
Doesn't seem horrible. But how does one move 4TB of data (from different servers) all to one server?
Depends on the type of data. XenServer, just Storage VMotion it over. Transparent, no one knows it happened until things get faster.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
I can't possibly state how bad of an idea it is to have an external enclosure for this BUT I could, just for hypothetical cases, build a 6TB pure SSD NAS, rackmount, full enterprise server chassis.... $3,400. I literally just priced out the drives and server for it.
what drives are you using? and what RAID level?
The Sumsung 2TB SSDs that I iinked, RAID 5.
-
The CPU and memory were bare minimums to have from xbyte so... why not.
As for the drives they are physical file shares at the moment... so yeah....
-
@DustinB3403 said:
We'd then have to move all of our data over to it, remap our shares, and have our backup appliance backup a single server...
But never do this. It's all just a silly exercise to show how easy it would be to build an SSD SAN and/or NAS device.
You would always do your project with local storage. Same SSDs, same RAID 5. But never SAN or NAS.
-
@DustinB3403 said:
As for the drives they are physical file shares at the moment... so yeah....
Fix that too by going to a file server VM on the same device.
-
So build a massive XenServer with ton's of local SSD storage and then migrate the data into the VM. Consolidating it all into a single VM.
I'd really need a much larger CIFS file server to make my backups then ..... haha
-
@DustinB3403 said:
I'd really need a much larger CIFS file server to make my backups then ..... haha
Total backup size should not change from what you have to backup already. Just all from one place rather than from multiple.
-
@DustinB3403 said:
So build a massive XenServer with ton's of local SSD storage and then migrate the data into the VM. Consolidating it all into a single VM.
XenServer or HyperV, yes. One big server, one bit RAID 5 SSD array, everything a VM. Insanely fast (tens or hundreds of times faster than the same setup with a NAS/SAN connection), extremely reliable (more reliable than anything else discussed here) for super cheap and incredibly easy to manage.
-
Its a huge win, safe, fast and reliable while saving 90% of the money.
-
True, and I'd still be using the same appliance I have, and I suppose I could have 2 partitions on the VM the "C" drive for the OS, and a "D" for data with shares under it.
-
@DustinB3403 said:
True, and I'd still be using the same appliance I have, and I suppose I could have 2 partitions on the VM the "C" drive for the OS, and a "D" for data with shares under it.
For a file server yes you would often partition, although generally not necessary. For most things, like an app server, you would not even partition.
