| Gavin W. Burris on 9 May 2014 08:43:00 -0700 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| Re: [PLUG] iSCSI storage appliance(s) |
Hi, Carl. How about a simple, big, rack-mount server with lots of disk bays? Take a look at something like this: http://www.siliconmechanics.com/i50434/4u-storage-server.php You can get it configured with CentOS and a MegaRAID controller, which has a command line and GUI utility. 36 2TB hot-swap drives. Make three virtual disks in sets of 12. You could do RAID 6, or even RAID 6 plus a hot spare. Keep some cold spares on site. When you get an email warning of a failed disk, swap it out. Done. Put XFS on it and you have a 50TB NFS server. Cheers. On Fri 05/09/14 11:25AM -0400, Carl Johnson wrote: > What kind of hardware do you plan to use? > C.O.T.S x86 server grade stuff mostly. Need more specifics? > > Roughly how much storage do you plan to manage? We're going to start with > about 20TB. It's tough to plan how much we'll need though, as this is for > CCTV DVR's with motion detection. Hence the scalablity requirement. I'm > told that the pesky insurance company says their system needs to be capable > of retaining three years of recordings. So it's tough to gauge how much > we'll really need to do this again, because of different camera frame > rates/resolutions/how much motion etc. you get the idea..... > > Is ISCSI the only thing you'd like to do? I had thought about using NFS, > but I ended up using iSCSI because I thought it'd fit better. I was trying > to avoid layers of abstraction/complexity. Am I wrong? > > My main reason for not going the ZFS route is what you confirmed. Easy > scalability and RAM both of which potentially change the hardware scope the > most and, therefore, the cost. > > If a web UI is a lower priority for you, it sounds like this system will > be run by a reasonably technically proficient person. > SystemS, probably 15ish in total all said and done. But yeah....Hi, I'm > Carl, nice to meet you. ;-). There may be occasion where I'll need to talk > someone else thru say, a disk replacement, via phone or something so hence > the webUI need. > > As it is right now, I've got two boxes in a test system. One, the storage > box, is running CentOS. The other, the DVR itself, is an Ubuntu 12LTS box. > I may try a wash/rinse/repeat on the storage box with OMV though and see if > I like it or not. Though honestly, after reading thru your response, I'm > probably going to go either the OMV/debian route or ditch the appliance > overlay completely and use Centos/SoftRAID/Btrfs. > > Can you elaborate on the webmin idea? Specifically, what *.wbm's do I need > to do all that I'm asking? That may be something else I'll have to test > drive too. > > > > > On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:05 AM, PaulNM <plug@paulscrap.com> wrote: > > > On 05/08/2014 01:32 PM, Carl Johnson wrote: > > > Who's familiar with any of the NAS distros out there? > > > FreeNAS/NAS4Free/NAPP-it/Openfiler/Openmediavault.....etc.? > > > > > > > What kind of hardware do you plan to use? Roughly how much storage do > > you plan to manage? Is ISCSI the only thing you'd like to do? > > > > I have more personal experience with FreeNAS/NAS4Free than the others > > (except for the Webmin approach I'll mention later). Actually, to be > > precise, I've never used NAS4Free. It's a continuation of older versions > > of FreeNAS that I have used, though. > > > > Openfiler appears to be a dead project. Their last release is ~3 years > > old and there doesn't appear to be any real work going on. > > > > Never heard of or used NAPP-it, so can't really comment on it. It > > appears to be opensolaris/openindiana based? The site isn't very clear. > > > > Never heard of OpenMediaVault (OMV) either, though it looks *really* > > interesting as it's based on Debian. Not thrilled that they're still > > using Squeeze as a base so close to when security support is ending. > > Yes, I know Squeeze now has long term support, but that's a *very* > > recent change. Apparently there is a procedure to install OMV on > > Wheezy, though. > > > > I've done a project where we used a Debian install with Webmin. This > > approach is nice in that there's more flexibility to add other services > > down the road. Also, I have a great deal of experience managing Debian > > machines, so it's more comfortable for me. Webmin makes it easier for > > the less technical people to check up on things and handle simpler > > tasks. (I'll call this the WebMin approach.) > > > > > > > What I'd like to have : > > > 1. Flexibility of adding to the total unit capacity with drives of > > > different capacities. > > > > FreeNAS can handle this fine, it prefers using ZFS pools. (If you're > > familiar with LVM, ZFS is somewhat similar in concept but with more > > features.) NAS4Free and NAPP-it should be the same for the same reasons. > > > > OMV and the Webmin approach I mentioned are both linux based. You can > > easily used LVM, RAID, or some combination of both. > > > > That said: > > > > You are aware that RAID/RAIDZ implementations are limited by the > > smallest member of their array/volume, right? No matter what solution > > you end up using, you'll hit this limitation. There is unRAID, but > > that's not so good redundancy-wise. ISCSI would be problematic with > > unRAID, and you have to pay if you use more than 3 drives. > > > > > > > 2. Fault tolerance of at least one drive failure; two preferred. > > > > Here's where it gets tricky. ZFS does support setting up a mirror as > > well as a few software raid implementations (RAIDZ1/RAIDZ2/RAIDZ3). > > > > What it doesn't support is adding drives to an existing RAIDZ set. Not a > > problem if you're starting with all the drives you plan to use, but if > > you ever want to add more drives to the RAIDZ: > > You'll need to backup the data, > > destroy the old RAIDZ, > > create a new RAIDZ consisting of the drives from the old one and any new > > drives, > > restore the backup. > > > > The other option is to add drives in pairs/triplets and make them > > separate RAIDZ volumes. > > > > MDADM (Linux RAID) can very easily add drives to existing arrays. > > You'll have to expand any LVM volume and filesystem on it afterwards. > > > > > 3. Presenting the storage via an iSCSI target. > > > > Trivial in FreeNAS/NAS4Free. NAPP-it can apparently do this as well. OMV > > has a plugin for this, as does Webmin. > > > > > 4. Adding and/or replacing disks without taking the ISCSI target offline. > > > > If the target is a RAIDZ or RAID volume, then yes. > > > > > 5. Admin/management via a web UI (not nearly as important as the other > > > four, if I have to use the CLI, so be it.) > > > > All of the examples at the top are geared towards web UI, though many > > also let you use a terminal or ssh in. > > > > > > > > Pros/Cons/Suggestions/Thoughts/Tar/Feathers? > > > > > > > The problem with ZFS is that it has many great features, but not all > > apply at once. I was looking into it for a major project and got really > > excited reading about all the great support it has for adding drives > > expanding pools, snapshots, and RAIDZ. It wasn't until I got into the > > details via a test VM that I found out about RAIDZ volumes not being > > expandable. > > > > You also need to make sure that whatever OS you use has a version of ZFS > > that supports the feature(s) you want to use. I wouldn't mess with ZFS > > on linux at all. > > > > Also, ZFS isn't really recommended for 32-bit systems. You can do it, > > but I really don't advise it if you'll be dealing with large amounts of > > storage. Especially if combined with low amounts of RAM. > > > > On the other hand, LVM and Linux RAID are very mature approaches with > > easy to use tools. > > > > If a web UI is a lower priority for you, it sounds like this system will > > be run by a reasonably technically proficient person. The older I get, > > and the more projects I get under my belt, the less I like the > > all-in-one or "appliance" approaches. > > > > If you just do a standard install of a distro, you'll get continuous > > security updates and a great deal of flexibility. The downside is it > > takes a little more know-how to get things setup. The really nice thing > > about Webmin vs some of the other admin interfaces like cpanel/plesk/etc > > is that Webmin doesn't really mess with the installed system or make > > specialized customizations to it. It's really just a GUI that edits the > > config files for you, while still giving you the option to edit them > > yourself. I'm curious where OMV falls on this spectrum. > > > > > > - PaulNM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > > Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- > > http://www.phillylinux.org > > Announcements - > > http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce > > General Discussion -- > > http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org > Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce > General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug -- Gavin W. Burris Senior Project Leader for Research Computing The Wharton School University of Pennsylvania ___________________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug