The Cache: Technology Expert's Forum
 
*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. October 16, 2019, 03:51:09 PM

Login with username, password and session length


Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
Author Topic: 'Doz document server, 8 drives in RAID 1/0 nn help...  (Read 5352 times)
perkiset
Olde World Hacker
Administrator
Lifer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10096



View Profile
« on: February 09, 2009, 11:31:11 AM »

I have to build and deploy a box at a client's with 8 500G drives that we want to have in a 2x4 situation, 4 being raid 0 and the other 4 being raid 1 of the first four, so I get a mirrored raid box. Have no idea how to do this best, anyone got some hints/tips/pointers? I was thinking of 'nixing it, then SAMBA - that makes me happier, but would I have the same sort of control over domain/workgroup perms as I will with, say, 2003 Server?

J'preciate...,
/p
Logged

It is now believed, that after having lived in one compound with 3 wives and never leaving the house for 5 years, Bin Laden called the U.S. Navy Seals himself.
nutballs
Administrator
Lifer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5627


Back in my day we had 9 planets


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: February 09, 2009, 01:05:19 PM »

errr. raid 5?
We ran mirrored raid 5's.
You could also do raid 6, though people might think your weird...

your math is wrong also.
raid 0 will be total 2TB in size, stripped for speed.
raid 1 will be total 1TB in size, mirrored for failure.

you need 8 drives on raid1 to mirror 4 drives on raid 0.
First question, do you have real raid controllers? or using software raid under server2003?

call if you need realtime blabber.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2009, 01:10:58 PM by nutballs » Logged

I could eat a bowl of Alphabet Soup and shit a better argument than that.
perkiset
Olde World Hacker
Administrator
Lifer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10096



View Profile
« Reply #2 on: February 09, 2009, 01:11:06 PM »

I may well, because I've been ... um, presented with this machine and configuration and get the notable privilege of making it work.

@ size, confused: if I have 8 500Gs, if I put 2 banks 4 @ simple 0 striping, wouldn't I have two banks of 2T each?

Perhaps I have my nomenclature off - I thought a zero was simple stripe, so that 2 drives can behave like one. You lose a titch in the OS to it, but essentially you get the capacity of the drives combined. Thought Raid 1 is simple mirroring. So I've heard people use the term "Raid 10 (ten)" to describe a combo of simple stripes, mirrored - am I way off base here or have I been buffaloed by geeks that need cred?
Logged

It is now believed, that after having lived in one compound with 3 wives and never leaving the house for 5 years, Bin Laden called the U.S. Navy Seals himself.
vsloathe
vim ftw!
Global Moderator
Lifer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1669



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: February 09, 2009, 01:18:53 PM »

Do RAID 5 (striped + parity)

You won't need as many drives (could do the same thing you are suggesting with 6 instead of Cool, you will get both the redundancy and the speed benefits.

As far as SMB vs. native Windows filesharing - as against-my-nature as it is, I would recommend that you just go with the Windows solution.

I've followed and contributed some code to various samba FOSS projects over the years. They are nowhere near as reliable as they should be. It's mostly MS's fault. They constantly come up with tacked on half-implemented functionality that they add to WFS (Windows Filesharing) without telling anyone about it.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2009, 01:26:26 PM by vsloathe » Logged

hai
vsloathe
vim ftw!
Global Moderator
Lifer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1669



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: February 09, 2009, 01:25:33 PM »

Perhaps I have my nomenclature off - I thought a zero was simple stripe, so that 2 drives can behave like one. You lose a titch in the OS to it, but essentially you get the capacity of the drives combined.

The advantage isn't so much the size of the combined drives as the fact that they are written in parallel (as long as you put them on separate cables - PUT THEM ON SEPARATE CABLES). This gives a massive speed boost, as drive seek and i/o tends to be the modern computer's bottleneck.

Quote
Thought Raid 1 is simple mirroring. So I've heard people use the term "Raid 10 (ten)" to describe a combo of simple stripes, mirrored - am I way off base here or have I been buffaloed by geeks that need cred?

Don't know. You must talk to different geeks than I do. RAID 1 is simple 1:1 mirroring. RAID 5 is a striped/parity combo and you need 3 identical drives for each array (unless you use a software controller, in which case you can use drives of any size but the footprint will be the combo of the 2 smallest drives). If any one drive fails, you can autorecover it from the remaining 2. As long as the machine is not one that will be rarely looked-after or maintained, RAID 5 is always always always superior to any other combination from a price, performance, and redundancy standpoint.
Logged

hai
vsloathe
vim ftw!
Global Moderator
Lifer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1669



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: February 09, 2009, 01:28:15 PM »

One last thing too:

http://www.freenas.org/

Highly recommend that if you want to stay out of the Windows world. It does software RAID, is highly configurable through a builtin apache server/web interface. Best of all it's near-0-config and it runs on BSD.
Logged

hai
nutballs
Administrator
Lifer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5627


Back in my day we had 9 planets


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: February 09, 2009, 01:59:33 PM »

Perk you are right. I thought you were saying 2 different raids. one as raid0 and a completely seperate one to back it up as raid1. But you are saying 2 raid0's that are mirrors. got it.

raid0 is JBOD, but striped to make it faster. it's purely for speed of access and offers ZERO safety. You get 100% of all your drive space added up. so 4x500=2TB
Raid1 is mirrored. and NOT striped. just 2 sets of matching drives (some controllers allow non-matching, but use smallest mirror value). so 4x500=2x2x500=1tb per mirror.

Raid10 is actually mirrored raid0's. So you technically have a raid0, that has a matching raid0 mirroring it. However, I am pretty sure you are actually just talking about duplexing the raid0.

If the machine has no hardware raid, or the raid is not external, then, its probably just using software, in which case you are only going to have raid0 or 1 available, though... You might have raid5 available in software under 2003. you know, actually, i think you do. hmm. Im gonna instal a VM of it, because I am curious.
Anyway...
then your raid5 would be (8-1)x500=3.5tb and would have single drive failure tolerance, plus the speed increase of raid0 (almost).

So. IF you can do raid5, just do it man. Wink

on the windows vs linux. if this requires any level of security, just stick with windows. mixed mode shit gets weird, and when things get patched, things break. If you stay in windows, its all AD to manage the perms, and not a big deal to get it all to play nice.
Logged

I could eat a bowl of Alphabet Soup and shit a better argument than that.
perkiset
Olde World Hacker
Administrator
Lifer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10096



View Profile
« Reply #7 on: February 09, 2009, 02:32:04 PM »

@ Windows: The last Windoz servers I had up and relied upon were NT3.51 (I KNOW I KNOW) and I had to institute a "Reboot every night" protocol because they leaked so badly. The big QQ: If I put a 2003 server online will it just frigging run, or will I have to babysit the damn thing? I am thinking that I'll get off a whole lot easier going Windows, and it certainly limits my exposure to the "Why did you make THAT choice" question, but if I have to visit the thing every couple days I'll be really pissed off.

It sounds like, from both of you, that I should go 5 - but that's a hardware solution, correct? The box I am installing this in is a brand new reasonably high end HP 2U server (buncha proc) with 8 drive bays right in the front. I am thinking that it must have hardware raid control, given what it is, but I've not even cracked it open yet.

Doesn't sound as tough when you guys talk it. When installing Doz, will it ask me such questions, or will there be a driver/install hootenannie I'll need to work through?
Logged

It is now believed, that after having lived in one compound with 3 wives and never leaving the house for 5 years, Bin Laden called the U.S. Navy Seals himself.
vsloathe
vim ftw!
Global Moderator
Lifer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1669



View Profile
« Reply #8 on: February 09, 2009, 02:37:11 PM »

Your server should come preconfigured to auto-load the drivers your hardware RAID will need in order to get windows to see it.

If not, it's kind of a pain. F6 and all that joy.
Logged

hai
perkiset
Olde World Hacker
Administrator
Lifer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10096



View Profile
« Reply #9 on: February 09, 2009, 03:30:28 PM »

Smooch @ Nuts: Thanks for the call meng, made LOADSA sense. J'preciate.

For all watching, the end result looks like Windows, RAID 5+0. I'll post as I work through it, for other Windows neophytes.
Logged

It is now believed, that after having lived in one compound with 3 wives and never leaving the house for 5 years, Bin Laden called the U.S. Navy Seals himself.
nutballs
Administrator
Lifer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5627


Back in my day we had 9 planets


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: February 09, 2009, 03:40:24 PM »

to add.

perk is working from blank box. parts in wrappers still.

but basic setup I recommended was
4 disks on raid5
3 disks on raid0 mirroring the data as a redundant backup in case of cascade failure of raid5
and the left over disk as the system drive, not on the raid channels.

since this box is intended to be a document server, putting the OS on raid is not necessary, and actually might "get in the way". Also the mission critical is data integrity. Data availability is of course important, but it is not fatal if offline, just pauses business, which sucks, but survivable.

windows2003 has raid support and management built in, though, if the machine has "fancy raids" then the machine will have it's own raid drivers and manager, possibly at boot via bios like screens. If its software only, then windows2003 is fine for it.

At least thats all in theory... Wink
Logged

I could eat a bowl of Alphabet Soup and shit a better argument than that.
nutballs
Administrator
Lifer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5627


Back in my day we had 9 planets


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: February 09, 2009, 07:22:47 PM »

ok perk. I just created your setup under a VM. Almost.
using just the windows software raid.

I have a raid5 and a raid0. both arrays of the same size.

the only thing I am not sure on is how to mirror the raid5 ONTO the raid0.
since its a nested array, its not built into windows. but your raid software that comes with the raid cards/chips might have it.

also, i forgot that raid 6 requires a minimum of 8 drives, so you could do it, if your chip/cards support it. however, then everything would be on "1 drive" including the OS. no biggy really, and frankly, raid6 is pretty damn solid since you have 2 drive failure tolerance, and actually even up to 4 if the failures are on different sub-arrays.

so 5+0 is pretty damn good, but a bit complicated. 6 however is simpler from a management point.

are the drives hot-swap by the way?
Logged

I could eat a bowl of Alphabet Soup and shit a better argument than that.
perkiset
Olde World Hacker
Administrator
Lifer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10096



View Profile
« Reply #12 on: February 10, 2009, 02:32:03 PM »

ok perk. I just created your setup under a VM. Almost.
using just the windows software raid.
Cool. I'll be Server 2003 (Standard). Good for you to know what I've got there, because I'm almost ready to discuss having you involved again. When would be good for the JBomb and PinkHat to tele and ink a date? Needs to be done.
 

I have a raid5 and a raid0. both arrays of the same size.

the only thing I am not sure on is how to mirror the raid5 ONTO the raid0.
since its a nested array, its not built into windows. but your raid software that comes with the raid cards/chips might have it.
Hmm... thought that'd be a slam dunk, looking forward to hearing which switch to throw. I like the solution a lot in theory.


also, i forgot that raid 6 requires a minimum of 8 drives, so you could do it, if your chip/cards support it. however, then everything would be on "1 drive" including the OS. no biggy really, and frankly, raid6 is pretty damn solid since you have 2 drive failure tolerance, and actually even up to 4 if the failures are on different sub-arrays.
I'm in discussion with procurement re. a tape carousel(lib) or disk backup - I'm wondering if I just stick another cheap JBOD on as the actual backup, so that I could use R6 - does this infer, tho, that you are less unattracted to it than yesterday?


are the drives hot-swap by the way?
Yes, I believe so. Build day is Thursday, so I'll fill you in then. Wanna do some lunch? Seems we have a little chunk of white plastic we still need to swap...
Logged

It is now believed, that after having lived in one compound with 3 wives and never leaving the house for 5 years, Bin Laden called the U.S. Navy Seals himself.
nutballs
Administrator
Lifer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5627


Back in my day we had 9 planets


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: February 10, 2009, 11:33:20 PM »

J is swamped. like, crazy bitch, not enough time in the day kind. Not sure if i mentioned this, but we are merging, and growing. New company, bigger shoes to fill, all that. It might be a while yet, before she has time.
So, hectic has been relaxing in comparison...
more details when we launch in a couple weeks. Wink

One reason I don't like raid6 is that it breads overconfidence. In your case, probably not a problem. LOL
since I am sure you will back up the backups. plus it is a bit "exotic".

I prefer JBOD as backup. BUT. i would use a backup solution. mirroring, just mirrors the problems when they happen. two different methods is better than 1. just get a big cheap ass NAS or a little shuttle box and stuff in a few drives (thats what I did). Put it at the other end of the building, networked of course.

Sure I can do lunch thursday if you want. I can put in my 2 cents if you need help of course, lend a hand even. And of course, the little plastic box, which at this point, I can't even remember how I left it... lol I will check it tomorrow.

let me know on IM/email what time and where.

Logged

I could eat a bowl of Alphabet Soup and shit a better argument than that.
perkiset
Olde World Hacker
Administrator
Lifer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10096



View Profile
« Reply #14 on: February 11, 2009, 10:04:53 AM »

I'll ping today a bit later.
Logged

It is now believed, that after having lived in one compound with 3 wives and never leaving the house for 5 years, Bin Laden called the U.S. Navy Seals himself.
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Perkiset's Place Home   Best of The Cache   phpMyIDE: MySQL Stored Procedures, Functions & Triggers
Politics @ Perkiset's   Pinkhat's Perspective   
cache
mart
coder
programmers
ajax
php
javascript
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC
Seo4Smf v0.2 © Webmaster's Talks


Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!