[CentOS] 8-15 TB storage: any recommendations?

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 11:43:35AM +0100, Peter Kjellstrom wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 January 2010, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 01:05:39AM +0100, Peter Kjellstrom wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 12 January 2010, Les Mikesell wrote:
> > > > On 1/12/2010 10:39 AM, Peter Kjellstrom wrote:
> > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > > >>> ...that said, it's not much worse than the competetion, storage
> > > > >>> simply sucks ;-(
> > > > >>
> > > > >> So you are saying people dole out huge amounts of money for rubbish?
> > > > >> That the software raid people were and have always been right?
> > > > >
> > > > > Nope, storage sucks, that includes the software ;-)
> > > >
> > > > If you can split the storage up into 2TB or smaller volumes that you
> > > > can mount into sensible locations to spread the load and avoid
> > > > contention you can always use software RAID1.
> > >
> > > Funny you should mention software RAID1... I've seen two instances of
> > > that getting silently out-of-sync and royally screwing things up beyond
> > > all repair.
> > >
> > > Maybe this thread has gone on long enough now?
> >
> > Not yet :)
> >
> > Please tell more about your hardware and software. What distro? What
> > kernel? What disk controller? What disks?
> 
> Both of my data-points are several years old so most of the details are lost 
> in the fog-of-lost-memories...
> 

Ok.. too bad. 

> Both were on desktop class hardware with onboard IDE or SATA. If I remember 
> correctly one was on CentOS(4?) and one was on either an old Ubuntu or a 
> classic debian (atleast we're talking 2.6 kernels).
> 
> My main point was that, nope, linux-md is not the holy grail either.
> 
> The only storage products that I've not had fail me tend to be either:
>  1) Those that are too new (give them time)
>  2) Those that I havn't tried (in scale) yet (which always gives a strong "the 
> grass is greener on the other side feeling")
> 

Yep :)

-- Pasi