> Also in our favour is that the users of the cluster we are currently
> intending for this have established a practice of storing large objects.
That definitely is in your favor.
> but it remains to be seen how 60x 22TB behaves in practice.
Be sure you don't get SMR drives.
> and it's
On 16/1/24 11:39, Anthony D'Atri wrote:
by “RBD for cloud”, do you mean VM / container general-purposes volumes
on which a filesystem is usually built? Or large archive / backup
volumes that are read and written sequentially without much concern for
latency or throughput?
General purpose
>Groovy. Channel drives are IMHO a pain, though in the case of certain
>manufacturers it can be the only way to get firmware updates. Channel drives
>often only have a 3 year warranty, vs 5 for generic drives.
Yes, we have run into this with Kioxia as far as being able to find new
firmware.
>
> NVMe SSDs shouldn’t cost significantly more than SATA SSDs. Hint: certain
> tier-one chassis manufacturers mark both the fsck up. You can get a better
> warranty and pricing by buying drives from a VAR.
>
> We stopped buying “Vendor FW” drives a long time ago.
Groovy.
By HBA I suspect you mean a non-RAID HBA?
Yes, something like the HBA355
NVMe SSDs shouldn’t cost significantly more than SATA SSDs. Hint: certain
tier-one chassis manufacturers mark both the fsck up. You can get a better
warranty and pricing by buying drives from a VAR.
We
by “RBD for cloud”, do you mean VM / container general-purposes volumes on
which a filesystem is usually built? Or large archive / backup volumes that
are read and written sequentially without much concern for latency or
throughput?
How many of those ultra-dense chassis in a cluster? Are all
On 12/1/24 22:32, Drew Weaver wrote:
So we were going to replace a Ceph cluster with some hardware we had
laying around using SATA HBAs but I was told that the only right way to
build Ceph in 2023 is with direct attach NVMe.
These kinds of statements make me at least ask questions. Dozens of
>
> Now that you say it's just backups/archival, QLC might be excessive for
> you (or a great fit if the backups are churned often).
PLC isn’t out yet, though, and probably won’t have a conventional block
interface.
> USD70/TB is the best public large-NVME pricing I'm aware of presently; for
>> So we were going to replace a Ceph cluster with some hardware we had
>> laying around using SATA HBAs but I was told that the only right way
>> to build Ceph in 2023 is with direct attach NVMe.
My impression are somewhat different:
* Nowadays it is rather more difficult to find 2.5in SAS or
On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 03:21:11PM +, Drew Weaver wrote:
> Oh, well what I was going to do wAs just use SATA HBAs on PowerEdge R740s
> because we don't really care about performance as this is just used as a copy
> point for backups/archival but the current Ceph cluster we have [Which is
>
ey meet your needs
>
> Anyway thanks.
> -Drew
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Robin H. Johnson
> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2024 5:00 PM
> To: ceph-users@ceph.io
> Subject: [ceph-users] Re: recommendation for barebones server with 8-12
>
e the $/GB on datacenter NVMe drives like Kioxia,
etc is still pretty far away from what it is for HDDs (obviously).
Anyway thanks.
-Drew
-Original Message-
From: Robin H. Johnson
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2024 5:00 PM
To: ceph-users@ceph.io
Subject: [ceph-users] Re: recommendation for barebo
Agreed, though today either limits one’s choices of manufacturer.
> There are models to fit that, but if you're also considering new drives,
> you can get further density in E1/E3
___
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io
To unsubscribe send
On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 02:32:12PM +, Drew Weaver wrote:
> Hello,
>
> So we were going to replace a Ceph cluster with some hardware we had
> laying around using SATA HBAs but I was told that the only right way
> to build Ceph in 2023 is with direct attach NVMe.
>
> Does anyone have any
On 14/1/2024 1:57 pm, Anthony D'Atri wrote:
The OP is asking about new servers I think.
I was looking his statement below relating to using hardware laying
around, just putting out there some options which worked for use.
So we were going to replace a Ceph cluster with some hardware we had
The OP is asking about new servers I think.
> On Jan 13, 2024, at 9:36 PM, Mike O'Connor wrote:
>
> Because it's almost impossible to purchase the equipment required to convert
> old drive bays to u.2 etc.
>
> The M.2's we purchased are enterprise class.
>
> Mike
>
>
>> On 14/1/2024
Because it's almost impossible to purchase the equipment required to
convert old drive bays to u.2 etc.
The M.2's we purchased are enterprise class.
Mike
On 14/1/2024 12:53 pm, Anthony D'Atri wrote:
Why use such a card and M.2 drives that I suspect aren’t enterprise-class?
Instead of U.2,
Why use such a card and M.2 drives that I suspect aren’t enterprise-class?
Instead of U.2, E1.s, or E3.s ?
> On Jan 13, 2024, at 5:10 AM, Mike O'Connor wrote:
>
> On 13/1/2024 1:02 am, Drew Weaver wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> So we were going to replace a Ceph cluster with some hardware we had
On 13/1/2024 1:02 am, Drew Weaver wrote:
Hello,
So we were going to replace a Ceph cluster with some hardware we had laying
around using SATA HBAs but I was told that the only right way to build Ceph in
2023 is with direct attach NVMe.
Does anyone have any recommendation for a 1U barebones
19 matches
Mail list logo
