|
Replies:
5
-
Last Post:
Nov 24, 2009 10:09 AM
by: mlaspina
|
|
|
Posts:
19
From:
Registered:
3/12/07
|
|
|
|
[storage-discuss] X45xx storage vs 7xxx Unified storage
Posted:
Nov 17, 2009 9:20 AM
|
|
We are looking at adding to our storage. We would like ~20TB-30 TB.
we have ~ 200 nodes (1100 cores) to feed data to using nfs, and we are looking for high reliability, good performance (up to at least 350 MBytes /second over 10 GigE connection) and large capacity.
For the X45xx (aka thumper) capacity and performanance seem to be there (we have 3 now)
However, for system upgrades , maintenance and failures, we have an availability problem.
For the 7xxx in a cluster configuration, we seem to be able to solve the availability issue, and perhaps get performance benefits the SSD.
however, the costs constrain the capacity we could afford.
If anyone has experience with both systems, or with the 7xxx system in a cluster configuration, we would be interested in hearing:
1) Does the 7xxx perform as well or better than thumpers?
2) Does the 7xxx failove r work as expected (in test and real life)
3) Does the SSD really help?
4) Do the analytics help prevent and solve real problems, or arui?he ge they frivolous pretty pictures?
5) is the 7xxx really a black box to be managed only by the GUI?
6) If are in or near Toronto, would you be willing to let us see your setup?
Thanks for any insights you may have and are willing to share.
Len Zaifman
Systems Manager, High Performance Systems
The Centre for Computational Biology
The Hospital for Sick Children
555 University Ave.
Toronto, Ont M5G 1X8
tel: 416-813-5513
email: leonardz at sickkids dot ca
This e-mail may contain confidential, personal and/or health information(information which may be subject to legal restrictions on use, retention and/or disclosure) for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by anyone other than the person for whom it was originally intended is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
_______________________________________________
storage-discuss mailing list
storage-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss
|
|
|
Posts:
19
From:
Registered:
3/12/07
|
|
|
|
Re: [storage-discuss] X45xx storage vs 7xxx Unified storage
Posted:
Nov 23, 2009 11:46 AM
in response to: leonardz
|
|
I asked this question a week ago but now I have what I feel are reasonable pricing numbers :
For 2 X4540s (24 TB each) I pay 6% more than for one 7310 redundant cluster (2 7310s in a cluster configuration) with 22 TB of disk and 2 x 18 GB SSDs.
I lose live redundancy, but can switch the filerserver serving nodes with a short downtime if I have 2 X4540s.
I have a live copy of 1/2 the disk on one file server and a backup copy of the other half of the disk on the same fileserver. The second server then has the other half live , and the first half mirrored.
So I now have 2 disk paths and two network paths as opposed to only one in the 7310 cluster.
Under these circumstances what advantage would a 7310 cluster over 2 X4540s backing each other up and splitting the load?
Len Zaifman
Systems Manager, High Perime formance Systems
The Centre for Computational Biology
The Hospital for Sick Children
555 University Ave.
Toronto, Ont M5G 1X8
tel: 416-813-5513
email: leonardz at sickkids dot ca
________________________________________
From: Len Zaifman
Sent: November 17, 2009 12:20 PM
To: storage-discuss at opensolaris dot org; zfs-discuss at opensolaris dot org
Subject: X45xx storage vs 7xxx Unified storage
We are looking at adding to our storage. We would like ~20TB-30 TB.
we have ~ 200 nodes (1100 cores) to feed data to using nfs, and we are looking for high reliability, good performance (up to at least 350 MBytes /second over 10 GigE connection) and large capacity.
For the X45xx (aka thumper) capacity and performanance seem to be there (we have 3 now)
However, for system upgrades , maintenance and failures, we have an availability problem.
For the 7xxx in a cluster configuration, we seem to be able to solve the availability issue, and perhaps get performance benefits the SSD.
however, the costs constrain the capacity we could afford.
If anyone has experience with both systems, or with the 7xxx system in a cluster configuration, we would be interested in hearing:
1) Does the 7xxx perform as well or better than thumpers?
2) Does the 7xxx failove r work as expected (in test and real life)
3) Does the SSD really help?
4) Do the analytics help prevent and solve real problems, or arui?he ge they frivolous pretty pictures?
5) is the 7xxx really a black box to be managed only by the GUI?
6) If are in or near Toronto, would you be willing to let us see your setup?
Thanks for any insights you may have and are willing to share.
Len Zaifman
Systems Manager, High Performance Systems
The Centre for Computational Biology
The Hospital for Sick Children
555 University Ave.
Toronto, Ont M5G 1X8
tel: 416-813-5513
email: leonardz at sickkids dot ca
This e-mail may contain confidential, personal and/or health information(information which may be subject to legal restrictions on use, retention and/or disclosure) for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by anyone other than the person for whom it was originally intended is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
_______________________________________________
storage-discuss mailing list
storage-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
68
From:
NZ
Registered:
7/26/09
|
|
|
|
Re: [storage-discuss] [zfs-discuss] X45xx storage vs 7xxx Unified
storage
Posted:
Nov 23, 2009 1:33 PM
in response to: leonardz
|
|
Len Zaifman wrote:
<pre wrap="">Under these circumstances what advantage would a 7310 cluster over 2 X4540s backing each other up and splitting the load?
</pre>
FISH! My wife could drive a
7310 :-)
www.eagle.co.nz
This email is confidential and may be legally
privileged. If received in error please destroy and immediately notify
us.
_______________________________________________
storage-discuss mailing list
storage-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
David Magda
dmagda@ee.ryerson.ca
|
|
|
|
Re: [storage-discuss] [zfs-discuss] X45xx storage vs 7xxx Unified
storage
Posted:
Nov 23, 2009 1:39 PM
in response to: leonardz
|
|
On Nov 23, 2009, at 14:46, Len Zaifman wrote:
> Under these circumstances what advantage would a 7310 cluster over 2
> X4540s backing each other up and splitting the load?
Do you want to worry about your storage system at 3 AM?
That's what all these appliances (regardless of vendor) get you for
the extra cash: the manufacturers have test things out so they Just
Work. Of course if you're comfortable with creating your own fail-over
and redundancy system (or don't have the cash for the appliance), then
there's no reason why you can't roll your own.
It's the usual trade-off: time or money.
_______________________________________________
storage-discuss mailing list
storage-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
280
From:
US
Registered:
6/23/06
|
|
|
|
Re: [storage-discuss] [zfs-discuss] X45xx storage vs 7xxx Unified
storage
Posted:
Nov 23, 2009 1:57 PM
in response to: leonardz
|
|
Get the 7310 setup. Vs. the X4540 it is:
(1) less configuration on your clients
(2) instant failover with no intervention on your part
(3) less expensive
(4) expandable to 3x your current disk space
(5) lower power draw & less rack space
(6) So Simple, A Caveman Could Do It (tm)
-Erik
On Mon, 2009-11-23 at 14:46 -0500, Len Zaifman wrote:
> I asked this question a week ago but now I have what I feel are reasonable pricing numbers :
>
> For 2 X4540s (24 TB each) I pay 6% more than for one 7310 redundant cluster (2 7310s in a cluster configuration) with 22 TB of disk and 2 x 18 GB SSDs.
>
> I lose live redundancy, but can switch the filerserver serving nodes with a short downtime if I have 2 X4540s.
>
> I have a live copy of 1/2 the disk on one file server and a backup copy of the other half of the disk on the same fileserver. The second server then has the other half live , and the first half mirrored.
>
> So I now have 2 disk paths and two network paths as opposed to only one in the 7310 cluster.
>
> Under these circumstances what advantage would a 7310 cluster over 2 X4540s backing each other up and splitting the load?
> Len Zaifman
> Systems Manager, High Perime formance Systems
> The Centre for Computational Biology
> The Hospital for Sick Children
> 555 University Ave.
> Toronto, Ont M5G 1X8
>
> tel: 416-813-5513
> email: leonardz at sickkids dot ca
> ________________________________________
--
Erik Trimble
Java System Support
Mailstop: usca22-123
Phone: x17195
Santa Clara, CA
Timezone: US/Pacific (GMT-0800)
_______________________________________________
storage-discuss mailing list
storage-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
158
From:
CA
Registered:
6/20/08
|
|
|
|
Re: [storage-discuss] X45xx storage vs 7xxx Unified storage
Posted:
Nov 24, 2009 10:09 AM
in response to: leonardz
To: Communities » storage » discuss
|
|
Hi,
I run both an x4500 48x250Gb 32GB Of Ram and a 7410, 18x1TB,4ReadSSDs 2WriteSSDs, 64Gb Ram
I can real world push about 250MB/s mixed IO over a 4 IGbe port aggregate with about 3500 IOPs max. on the x4500.
On the 7410 it can real world push 550Mb/s mixed I/O over 10Gbe with about 16,000 IOPs max. (the 550 MBs would be much higher with more disk such as your requirement)
1) Does the 7xxx perform as well or better than thumpers?
Yes.
2) Does the 7xxx failover work as expected (in test and real life)
Yes ~ 30 Seconds of I/O pause.
3) Does the SSD really help?
Yes - Significantly
4) Do the analytics help prevent and solve real problems, or arui?he ge they
frivolous pretty pictures?
Yes - Best tool I have used to date.
5) is the 7xxx really a black box to be managed only by the GUI?
Yes. You have a CLI(Command Line) and a BUI (Browser) based admin console. You can go into the shell but it is not a supported method of admin nor is it advisable.
6) If are in or near Toronto, would you be willing to let us see your setup?
Winnipeg.
Regards,
Mike
Message was edited by: mlaspina
|
|
|
|
|
