RE: mass storage recommendations

> when u have 100TB from 750GB disks, raid5 is not enough for you. u
need
> to look at raid6.

Ok, thanks!

> > I was thinking that, only with the 8 (or maybe 10) disks per
physical
> > box, then tying them together with one box in the front, and it
doing
> > raid5 on the enbd disks it pulls in. In this way it would actually
take
> > 4 disks (two on two different systems) or 2 whole systems to fail
before
> > the data wouldn't be accessible (or the front end box, which that's
> > simple enough to fix, we just drop another front end in place enbd
the
> > backends into the new frontend).
> 
> raid5 over raid5 will be quite slow.

That was a concern of ours. Especially when we're talking about so many
enbd disks, we were even thinking about segmenting several machines on
separate gig switches to help reduce the network bottleneck.

> will u front end become a performance bottleneck? what kind of io
> workload u are expecting on this front end?

Mostly it's just read access. It's secondary storage and is only
accessed when the primary sources (which are remote and scattered across
the world) are either inaccessible or destroyed.

Thanks for your reply.

Richard W. Pickett, Jr.
President, CSR Technologies .com, Inc.
[email protected]
Office - (270) 746-0324
Cell    - (270) 303-9154