@wrcombs said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
So you know how Ive said i was booking flights and hotels like all last week?
That finally happened with 10 minutes left of the day at work .
I will be in Texas from 3:00 pm on the 3rd of October til 10:55 am on the 6th!
No way - you're going to Spiceworld?
@jaredbusch said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
@dave247 said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
@phlipelder said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
@dave247 said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
I'm planning the build on a new server. I originally intended on putting 8 x "900GB 15K RPM SAS 12Gbps 512e" drives into a RAID 10 config using an H740P adapter, but then I saw that there are quite a few options for SAS SSD. I haven't really learned too much about the differences of putting SSD in RAID and how it compares to HDD in RAID, so I wanted to see if anyone here (Scott) had any input on the matter.
Example: Would it be worth putting, say, 6 x "1.6TB SSD SAS Mix Use 12Gbps 512e" drives into a RAID 10 instead? Is there a better approach with SSD in RAID?
RAID 6 is the way to go. We lost a server after replacing a drive and it's RAID 10 pair decided to drop out about 5 to 10 minutes into a rebuild.
In our comparison testing 8x 10K SAS drives in RAID 6 has a mean throughput of 800MiB/Second and about 250-450 IOPS per disk depending on the storage stack configuration.
SAS SSD would be anywhere from 25K IOPS per disk to 55K-75K IOPS per disk depending on whether read intensive, mixed use, or write intensive. There are some good deals out there on HGST SSDs (our preferred SAS SSD vendor).
Yeah, I've decided on RAID 6 if I am able to go with SSD drives. I am building out the server on Dell and purchasing through our VAR when it comes time to order.
Serious question, now that you seem to understand the concepts of what you may actually need.
Why R6? Your current workload seems to be nowhere near that level of redundancy, and does not appear to need it. Use a pair of SSD in R1 or a triplet in R5.
Yeah, getting new hardware is a time to evaluate this. But why the big jump to R6?
Edit: Yes, I realize hat your early posts stated you wanted to minimize any potential downtime.
I was going to post exactly this.
Your current array of 4 drives (I think you said you have 4) Is at a pretty large risk compared to a 4 drive SSD array (again the drives are at least one order of magnitude safer than most HDDs).
Sure it might only be another $400 for that extra disk to give you RAID 6 vs RAID 5, but why spend it?
One of the big things Scott harps at around here is correct spending. Personally I'm a bit surprised he hasn't brought this fact up already (OK he did a bit when I asked why one would look at SATA SSD RAID 10 instead of NVMe RAID 1 - costs).
This really does boil down to math, but odds are of course never zero, and someone does have to be the one who suffers the failure outside of the typical odds from time to time.
@wrcombs said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dbeato said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@wrcombs said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dbeato said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@wrcombs said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dbeato said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
Just upgraded my Unifi Controller to 5.8.30.
Think I might do the same.. if I can only figure out how..
What do you mean? Are you using Windows, Mac or Linux?
Windows 10, I figured it out though.
Yeah, download the new installer, backup the configuration , stop the controller and run the upgrade.
Yep Yep, Just finished the upgrade of the firmware on the AP's themselves.
You're welcome.
@wrcombs said in Network error Windows 7:
@scottalanmiller said in Network error Windows 7:
@wrcombs said in Network error Windows 7:
@scottalanmiller said in Network error Windows 7:
@wrcombs said in Network error Windows 7:
Anyone ever see this error before? do you know what it means ? how to get rid of it?
No, because I carefully never do that, lol.
I didnt do this, this is from someone saying " This is how I think it goes" and changing settings.
Also something to avoid
Random people who don't know the basics, making completely crazy configuration changes... that's a disaster waiting to happen. Imagine if they were doing that on a PCI network or something
They did! we use 2 NICs, one for internet, one for the PoS system so they are "seperated" the best they can be. They stacked and added IP's to the PoS NIC, So all of the PoS were accessing the internet...
Sure, but the internal POS network doesn't have a gateway to some place else inside it, right? So you don't have a gateway on that network interface.
@pete-s said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
@dashrender said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
@dave247 said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
@dashrender said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
@dave247 said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
@darek-hamann said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
Before the RAID array type is selected, it would be great to know the workload in terms of write operations. For RAID5/6 write performance will be significantly lower than that of RAID10 on the same disks. Just bear that in mind.
Right, but compared to today, we are writing to six 10K RPM drives in a RAID5 config. This server is something like 6 years old and performance is acceptable. Going to new hardware, especially faster RPM drives or SSD drives will be a significant improvement.
OK I guess that's a good enough baseline then.
A RAID 1 two 4 TB SATA/SAS SSDs would crush your current system and save you a bundle.
Yeah, I was wondering that same thing actually. If I just purchased two 4TB 7.2K RPM 6Gbps SATA drives, would that actually be better than my current config as well as have the same level of reliability as the SAS drives?
I wanted to go with SSD since they are obviously way faster and last longer, in the event that we don't upgrade again for another 7 years or something.
Absolutely not.
@dave247, @dashrender said two 4TB SATA/SAS SSDs in RAID1, not HDDs.
Exactly. A RAID 1 SSD pair - be it SAS/SATA or NVMe will just crush the current storage system you have in place.
current system = 260/520 IOPs
RAID 1 SSD = 25,000/50,000 IOPs.
@pete-s said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
@dashrender said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
@pete-s said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
@dustinb3403 said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
@pete-s except the cost per GB is even more for U.2 drives than it is for the traditional formats.
Depends on how you calculate. One NVMe drive, say 4TB, it will beat the performance of four 1TB SATA SSD drives in RAID0. If you take 4x1TB drives and a raid controller the 4TB NVMe will be cheaper or similar. So per IOPS the NVMe drives are cheaper. And total failure rate is lower because you need fewer drives to accomplish the same thing.
If you on the other side take a 4TB NVMe drive compared to a 4TB SATA SSD you will pay about 25% premium for the NVMe drive. Intel for instance have their DC series of drives that are available both in SATA and NVMe which makes it easier to compare apples to apples.
Except in your RAID example above you totally miss that the OP wants hardware protection. So a RAID card is required regardless (either onboard real RAID 1 for your dual drive setup, or add-in card).
I didn't miss it, I just compared it performance wise. You could do RAID1 with two NVME drives but that would be some something like Intel RST (motherboard) so low cost. If you want a RAID controller that can come close to that, you need something very expensive, and then the 8x1TB SSD in RAID10 to go with it.
Why are you doing SSD RAID 10? just to try to come close performance wise to the NVMe?
@dave247 said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
@dashrender said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
@dave247 said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
@darek-hamann said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
Before the RAID array type is selected, it would be great to know the workload in terms of write operations. For RAID5/6 write performance will be significantly lower than that of RAID10 on the same disks. Just bear that in mind.
Right, but compared to today, we are writing to six 10K RPM drives in a RAID5 config. This server is something like 6 years old and performance is acceptable. Going to new hardware, especially faster RPM drives or SSD drives will be a significant improvement.
OK I guess that's a good enough baseline then.
A RAID 1 two 4 TB SATA/SAS SSDs would crush your current system and save you a bundle.
Yeah, I was wondering that same thing actually. If I just purchased two 4TB 7.2K RPM 6Gbps SATA drives, would that actually be better than my current config as well as have the same level of reliability as the SAS drives?
I wanted to go with SSD since they are obviously way faster and last longer, in the event that we don't upgrade again for another 7 years or something.
Absolutely not.
it's all about IOPs - A single 7.2K RPM SATA drive gives you something like 75 IOPs. That might be enough for you to run things on a desktop, but on a server, you'll be super unhappy.
You currently have six 10K RPM drives (let's assume you're getting 130 IOPs per drive). The RAID 5 you have has huge write penalties too.
I'm guessing you're probably getting around 260 IOPs of write, and maybe 520 IOPs of read (at max).
Now compare this to a two drive RAID 1 7.2K RPM array - remember, 7.2K drives only give you 75 IOPs. For Read we might get 2*75 = 150, for Write we only get one drive worth, or 75 IOPs.
A single Enterprise SSD likely gives you 25,000 IOPs on the low end (very low end) So a RAID 1 (two drives) 4 TB SSD array could give you 50,000 IOPs of Read and 25,000 of Write.
See the huge differences here?
@scottalanmiller said in Site Moved a PC=A MESS:
@jaredbusch said in Site Moved a PC=A MESS:
@dustinb3403 said in Site Moved a PC=A MESS:
@jaredbusch said in Site Moved a PC=A MESS:
@dustinb3403 said in Site Moved a PC=A MESS:
@wrcombs said in Site Moved a PC=A MESS:
@scottalanmiller said in Site Moved a PC=A MESS:
@wrcombs said in Site Moved a PC=A MESS:
@scottalanmiller said in Site Moved a PC=A MESS:
This is called sabotage. Someone broke something by doing something they clearly had no idea how to do. Now they are hiding things from you to keep it from getting fixed. Time to escalate. Let someone know that the Site Manager has overseen damage to the network and that you have no idea what they have done and that they either aren't able to tell you or are unwilling to do so. Communicate to the powers that be. The Site Manager is responsible, so of course he's trying to blame you. It's HIS fault.
You might need to suggest that given the unknown state of things, starting from scratch might be the best way to quickly resolve issues and know what the state of things is and what has been done.
And get it in writing that sites cannot make changes as policy.
My suggestion was to run new Cables to eat PoS Terminal and go from there. The network tech told him to get the team that moved it back out there - because was not either of our companies that made the move.
Everything has been documented, I may need to just escalate this some more.What company did it? And why is the site manager allowing random, third party companies to touch stuff?
Another Vendor said " I think this is how this goes so I will Do it." and he allowed them too; this is the new Site manager- the one who allowed them to move it is no longer with the site.
The who what or why is the least important thing to be concerned about now. If you have a cable tester, and a have a general idea of where the cable is going, check the switch to see if any of the ports are currently off.
Then put the cable tester on the PC end and get take the switch end and connect it to the tester. This will identify the cable as either being the "one" or not.
From there you just move the cable from that switch port to the new office space as the PoS or Internet line and plug it all back in.
That kind of cable testing is only a continuity tester. that does nothing for a live network because a jack plugged into a switch will not let it work right.
I know, which I why the testing is from the wall to the punchdown block.
That's why the LinkSprinter (or similar form other companies) is a staple for anyone doing actual network wiring for a living.
I love mine.
I love the free one I got!
@dave247 said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
@darek-hamann said in SAS SSD vs SAS HDD in a RAID 10?:
Before the RAID array type is selected, it would be great to know the workload in terms of write operations. For RAID5/6 write performance will be significantly lower than that of RAID10 on the same disks. Just bear that in mind.
Right, but compared to today, we are writing to six 10K RPM drives in a RAID5 config. This server is something like 6 years old and performance is acceptable. Going to new hardware, especially faster RPM drives or SSD drives will be a significant improvement.
OK I guess that's a good enough baseline then.
A RAID 1 two 4 TB SATA/SAS SSDs would crush your current system and save you a bundle.
