[GRLUG] Best Local SAN performance

[Grand Rapids Linux Users Group]

And when you get tired of having to go to command line for MDADM
manipulation (as I did ages ago), build a FreeNAS SAN server and never look
back.  :-)

Typically when I hear SAN, I think iSCSI or FC (for things like vMWare
ESXi). Whereas a NAS device for file-level access is easier to manage.
FreeNAS has you covered either way (including replication, encryption, AD
integration, etc).

If you don't want/need iSCSI and want to stick with Linux instead of
FreeBSB under the hood, check out the fork OpenMediaVault. Lotza features
and plugins on either platform.

Basically, if you plan on serving files via another server and are just
looking for redundant resilience, go for iscsi. If you don't have a
fileserver needing storage, SMB/CIFS and NFS are easily manageable (except
when you throw in Kerberos for NFS).

As Van said, a good switch and "10G-Tek" or Mellanox 10Gbe NICs will give
you cheap good perf either way.

cheers,
Godwin

ᕦ(ò_óˇ)ᕤ
do you even lift bro?
Ubber::Geek
http://grlug.org/

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020, 12:42 PM Grand Rapids Linux Users Group <
grlug at grlug.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 2020-06-15 at 14:27 -0400, Grand Rapids Linux Users Group
> wrote:
> > My personal preference, after building and maintaining my own for
> > over 10 years.. is..
> > A controller that does JBOD, partition 98-98% of the disks, use linux
> > mdadm software RAID in a raid-5 or 6 configuration.  The reason for
> > this is, if your controller goes bad, you can replace it with pretty
> > much anything and your system will still see your disks.  And with
> > software raid, you can easily expand the array as needed, and tailor
> > the re-sync to your needs.  You can also see details for the various
> > disks since they're not hidden behind a controller (so you can check
> > for bad sectors, read/write errors, etc easily.)
>
> I concur with the use of 'soft' raid a server;  hardware RAID can be a
> real pain to get working after a failure [which, isn't that kind the
> point?] while MD is really flexible and easy.  Also CPU, etc... isn't
> really a host side limitation anymore;  if you let the storage server
> focus on storage [and don't load on a bunch of other services] you can
> get blazing performance from a rather vanilla box.
>
> --
> Adam Tauno Williams, awilliam at whitemice.org
> Multi-Modal Activists Against Auto Dependent Development
> resisting the unAmerican socialists of the Motorist hegemony
> http://www.mmaaadd.org
> --
> grlug mailing list
> grlug at grlug.org
> https://shinobu.grlug.org/mailman/listinfo/grlug
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://shinobu.grlug.org/pipermail/grlug/attachments/20200617/5ec5e3dd/attachment.html>