[CentOS] Building a Back Blaze style POD
Rudi at SoftDux.com
Sun May 8 18:26:41 UTC 2011
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Jason <slackmoehrle.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
> I am about to embark on a project that deals with allowing information
> archival, over time and seeing change over time as well. I can explain it a
> lot better, but I would certainly talk your ear off. I really don't have a
> lot of money to throw at the initial concept, but I have some. This device
> will host all of the operations for the first few months until I can afford
> to build a duplicate device. I already had a few parts of the idea done and
> ready to get live.
> I am contemplating building a BackBlaze Style POD. The goal of the device
> is to start acting as a place to have the crawls store information, massage
> it, get it into db's and then notify the user the task is done so they can
> start looking at the results.
> For reference here are a few links:
> There is room for 45 drives in the case (technically a few more).
> 45 x 1tb 7200rpm drives is really cheap, about $60 each.
> 45 x 1.5tb 7200rpm drives are about $70 each.
> 45 x 2tb 7200rpm drives are about $120 each
> 45 x 3tb 7200rpm drives are about $180-$230 each (or more, some are almost
> I have question before I commit to building one and I was hoping to get
> 1. Can anyone recommend a mobo/processor setup that can hold lots of RAM?
> Like 24gb or 64gb or more?
Any brand server motherboard will do. I prefer supermicro, but you can use
Dell, HP, Intell, etc, etc.
> 2. Hardware RAID or Software RAID for this?
Hardware RAID will be expensive on 45 drives. IF you can, split the 45
drives into a few smaller RAID arrays. To rebuild 1x large 45TB RAID array,
with either hardware or software would probably take a week, or more,
depending on which RAID type you use - i.e. RAID 5, or 6, or 10. I prefer
RAID 10 since it's best for speed and the rebuilds are the quickest. But you
loose half the space, i.e. 45TB drives will give you about 22TB space. 45x
2TB HDD's would give you about 44TB space though.
> 3. Would CentOS be a good choice? I have never used CentOS on a device so
> massive. Just ordinary servers, so to speak. I assume that it could handle
> so many drives, a large, expanding file system.
Yes it would be fine.
> 4. Someone recommended ZFS but I dont recall that being available on
> CentOS, but it is on FreeBSD which I have little experience with.
I would also prefer to use ZFS for this type of setup. use one 128GB SL type
SSD drive as a cache drive to speed up things and 2x log drives to help with
drive recovery. With ZFS you would be able to use one large RAID array if
you have the log drives since it was recover from driver failure much better
than other file systems. Although you can install ZFS as user-land tools,
which will be slower than running it via the kernel. But, it would be better
to use Solaris or FreeBSD for this - look @ Nexenta / FreeNAS / OpenIndia
> 5. How would someone realistically back something like this up?
To another one as large :)
OR, more realistically, if you already have some backup servers, and the
full 45TB isn't full of data yet, then simply backup what you have. By the
sounds of it your project is still new so your data won't be that much. I
would simply build a gluster / CLVM cluster of smaller cheaper servers -
which basically allows you to add say 4TB / 8TB (depending on what chassis
you use and how many drives it can take) at a time to the backup cluster,
which will be cheaper than buying another one identical to this right now.
> Ultimately I know over time I need to distribute my architecture out and
> have a number of web-servers, balancing, etc but to get started I think this
> device with good backups might fit the bill.
If this device will be used for web + mail + SQL, then you may probably look
at using 4 quad core CPU's + 128GB RAM. With this many drives (or rather,
this much data) you'll probably run out of RAM / CPU / Network resources
before you run out of HDD space.
With a device this big (in terms of storage) I would rather have 2 separate
"processing" servers which just mounts LUN's from this POD (exported as NFS
/ iSCSI / FCoE / etc) and then have a few faster SAS / SSD drives for SQL
/ log processing.
> I can be way more detailed if it helps, I just didn't want to clutter with
> information that might not be relevant.
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
Technical Blog: http://Blog.SoftDux.com
Office: 087 805 9573
Cell: 082 554 7532
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the CentOS