Re: servers advise (dell r515 or supermicro ....)

[Stefan Priebe <s.priebe@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Am 15.01.2014 15:50, schrieb Sebastien Han:
> However you have to get > 480GB which ridiculously large for a journal. I believe they are pretty expensive too.

that's correct it just them instead of SATA or SAS disks in ceph ;-) so 
960GB makes sense.

> ––––
> Sébastien Han
> Cloud Engineer
>
> "Always give 100%. Unless you're giving blood.”
>
> Phone: +33 (0)1 49 70 99 72
> Mail: sebastien.han@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Address : 10, rue de la Victoire - 75009 Paris
> Web : www.enovance.com - Twitter : @enovance
>
> On 15 Jan 2014, at 15:49, Sebastien Han <sebastien.han@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Sorry I was only looking at the 4K aligned results.
> >
> > ––––
> > Sébastien Han
> > Cloud Engineer
> >
> > "Always give 100%. Unless you're giving blood.”
> >
> > Phone: +33 (0)1 49 70 99 72
> > Mail: sebastien.han@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Address : 10, rue de la Victoire - 75009 Paris
> > Web : www.enovance.com - Twitter : @enovance
> >
> > On 15 Jan 2014, at 15:46, Stefan Priebe <s.priebe@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > Am 15.01.2014 15:44, schrieb Mark Nelson:
> > > > On 01/15/2014 08:39 AM, Stefan Priebe wrote:
> > > > > Am 15.01.2014 15:34, schrieb Sebastien Han:
> > > > > > Hum the Crucial m500 is pretty slow. The biggest one doesn’t even
> > > > > > reach 300MB/s.
> > > > > > Intel DC S3700 100G showed around 200MB/sec for us.
> > > > >
> > > > > where did you get this values from? I've some 960GB and they all have >
> > > > > 450Mb/s write speed. Also in tests like here you see > 450MB/s
> > > > > http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crucial-m500-1tb-ssd,3551-5.html
> > > >
> > > > Looks like at least according to Anand's chart, you'll get full write
> > > > speed once you buy the 480GB model, but not for the 120 or 240GB models:
> > > >
> > > > http://www.anandtech.com/show/6884/crucial-micron-m500-review-960gb-480gb-240gb-120gb
> > >
> > > that's correct but the sentence was " The biggest one doesn’t even
> > > reach 300MB/s."
> > >
> > > > > > Actually, I don’t know the price difference between the crucial and
> > > > > > the intel but the intel looks more suitable for me. Especially after
> > > > > > Mark’s comment.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ––––
> > > > > > Sébastien Han
> > > > > > Cloud Engineer
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Always give 100%. Unless you're giving blood.”
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Phone: +33 (0)1 49 70 99 72
> > > > > > Mail: sebastien.han@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > Address : 10, rue de la Victoire - 75009 Paris
> > > > > > Web : www.enovance.com - Twitter : @enovance
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 15 Jan 2014, at 15:28, Mark Nelson <mark.nelson@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 01/15/2014 08:03 AM, Robert van Leeuwen wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Power-Loss Protection:  In the rare event that power fails while the
> > > > > > > > > drive is operating, power-loss protection helps ensure that data
> > > > > > > > > isn’t
> > > > > > > > > corrupted.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Seems that not all power protected SSDs are created equal:
> > > > > > > > http://lkcl.net/reports/ssd_analysis.html
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The m500 is not tested but the m4 is.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Up to now it seems that only Intel seems to have done his homework.
> > > > > > > > In general they *seem* to be the most reliable SSD provider.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Even at that, there has been some concern on the list (and lkml) that
> > > > > > > certain older Intel drives without super-capacitors are ignoring
> > > > > > > ATA_CMD_FLUSH, making them very fast (which I like!) but potentially
> > > > > > > dangerous (boo!).  The 520 in particular is a drive I've used for a
> > > > > > > lot of Ceph performance testing but I'm afraid that if it's not
> > > > > > > properly handling CMD FLUSH requests, it may not be indicative of the
> > > > > > > performance folks would see on other drives that do.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On the third hand, if drives with supercaps like the Intel DC S3700
> > > > > > > can safely ignore CMD_FLUSH and maintain high performance (even when
> > > > > > > there are a lot of O_DSYNC calls, ala the journal), that potentially
> > > > > > > makes them even more attractive (and that drive already has
> > > > > > > relatively high sequential write performance and high write endurance).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > > > Robert van Leeuwen
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > ceph-users mailing list
> > > > > > > > ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > > > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > ceph-users mailing list
> > > > > > > ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > ceph-users mailing list
> > > > > > ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ceph-users mailing list
> > ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com