[CentOS] RE: Largish filesystems [was Re: XFS install issue]
alain.terriault at mcgill.ca
Mon Jun 2 19:38:23 UTC 2008
Just wondering if any one ever consider/use Coraid for massive storage
It seems like a very reasonable option.. comments ?
I$ilon could also be a option for petabytes storage
mslist at opcenter.net wrote:
> To start I wish to that you for the swift response on this
> issue. I do not think that I would get such a quick
> response from a proprietary (closed-source) company. Open
> Source :-).
> To respond to one the comments about large file systems
> “recommend you split it in several smaller (2-4TB)
> filesystems “
> This is not feasible in many situations. In some
> situations 2-4TB is not even a reasonable starting point.
> A little background.
> I have been using RH from v2 to v9. and in v9 I did get an
> install ISO of RH9 that included XFS support. Way back
> then I used it on a 1.4TB PATA hardware raid 5 (A lot of
> disk for it time). The system is still operational with
> out any FS issues short of failed drives. Fixed with the
> hot spares on the system. in five years of operation the
> system has had one outage a maintenance reboot Less then
> 2min down). After RH9 I switched to Centos.
> The system that I am currently configuring with 7+ TB of
> storage is one of the smaller storage servers for our
> systems. Using the same configuration with more drives we
> are planning several 20TB+ systems.
> For the work we do a single file system over 100TB is not
> unreasonable. We will be replacing a 80TB SAN system based
> on StorNext with a Isilon system with 10G network
> If there was a way to create a Linux (Centos) 100TB –
> 500TB or larger clustered file system with the nodes
> connected via infiniband that was easily manageable with
> throughput that can support multiple 10Gbps Ethernet
> connections I would be very interested.
> And once more thanks for the fast response.
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
More information about the CentOS