Messages in this thread | | | From | "Magnus Näslund(b)" <> | Subject | Re: [OT] FibreChannel(or something) + Soft RAID | Date | Sun, 3 Oct 1999 06:47:32 +0200 |
| |
Yeah, i think scsii is an "safe" idea. If one uses fibrechannel, will it 'die' from the many devices (speedwise).
And if one can fit 4 scsii cards in one computer without driver compliants, it's an very interesting experiment to try, ain't it ? :D
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Programmer/Networker [|] Magnus Naeslund PGP Key: http://www.genline.nu/mag_pgp.txt -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-----Original Message----- From: Tom Livingston <tsl@volition.org> To: Magnus Näslund(b) <mag@bahnhof.se>; linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu <linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu> Date: den 3 oktober 1999 06:41 Subject: RE: [OT] FibreChannel(or something) + Soft RAID
> >Magnus Näslund wrote: >> Hello, i'm working on a project that includes a large amount of >> image files. >> There will be around 15 million files around 100Kb ~= 1.5TB. >> I am looking for cheap but _reliable_ ways of achieving this. > >I'm not quite sure what you'd consider cheap for this. Certainly 1.5TB >doesn't really fall into the traditional "cheap" model ;) > >The solution that first comes to my mind is using relatively standard >hardware. If you used two or four channel u2w or u2w lvd controllers, you >can fit 15 drives per channel. Two four channel u2w controllers could run a >max of 120 disks, and at say... 18G per disk, you could have 2.1TB online, >just through two pci slots. also, 3 dual channel controllers with 15 drives >would hit about 1.5TB. Performance, while probably quite fast, won't be in >line with that number of drives * their max throughput.. or really anything >close... as that many drives will completely saturate the scsi busses >involved. You could probably end up with as much as four of five four >channel controllers... with less drives per controller... and get a >considerable performance boost... though if it's a network centric >application it's worth noting that you can't use close to all of this >speed... one channel at 80MB/sec far faster than even several 100mbit cards >fully saturated. > >Software RAID has a limitation of 12 drives per set. You can up this a >certain amount... but to combine all of these drives into one set, you would >likely make X raid5 sets, maybe one per channel, and then combine the result >using raid1 or linear. Though you'll be using more disks for parity. > >Tom > >
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |