Re: Network redundancy pro and cons, best practice, suggestions?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Alexandre,

thanks for that suggestion. mellanox might be on our shoping list
already, but what regarding the redundandency design at all from your POV?

	/Götz
Am 13.04.15 um 11:08 schrieb Alexandre DERUMIER:
>>> So what would you suggest, what are your experiences?
> 
> Hi, you can have a look at mellanox sx1012 for example
> http://www.mellanox.com/page/products_dyn?product_family=163
> 
> 12 ports 40GB for around 4000€
> 
> you can use breakout cables to have 4x12 10GB ports.
> 
> 
> They can be stacked with mlag and lacp
> 
> 
> ----- Mail original -----
> De: "Götz Reinicke - IT Koordinator" <goetz.reinicke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> À: "ceph-users" <ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Envoyé: Lundi 13 Avril 2015 11:03:24
> Objet:  Network redundancy pro and cons, best practice,	suggestions?
> 
> Dear ceph users, 
> 
> we are planing a ceph storage cluster from scratch. Might be up to 1 PB 
> within the next 3 years, multiple buildings, new network infrastructure 
> for the cluster etc. 
> 
> I had some excellent trainings on ceph, so the essential fundamentals 
> are familiar to me, and I know our goals/dreams can be reached. :) 
> 
> There is just "one tiny piece" in the design I'm currently unsure about :) 
> 
> Ceph follows some sort of keep it small and simple, e.g. dont use raid 
> controllers, use more boxes and disks, fast network etc. 
> 
> So from our current design we plan 40Gb Storage and Client LAN. 
> 
> Would you suggest to connect the OSD nodes redundant to both networks? 
> That would end up with 4 * 40Gb ports in each box, two Switches to 
> connect to. 
> 
> I'd think of OSD nodes with 12 - 16 * 4TB SATA disks for "high" io 
> pools. (+ currently SSD for journal, but may be until we start, levelDB, 
> rocksDB are ready ... ?) 
> 
> Later some less io bound pools for data archiving/backup. (bigger and 
> more Disks per node) 
> 
> We would also do some Cache tiering for some pools. 
> 
> From HP, Intel, Supermicron etc reference documentations, they use 
> usually non-redundant network connection. (single 10Gb) 
> 
> I know: redundancy keeps some headaches small, but also adds some more 
> complexity and increases the budget. (add network adapters, other 
> server, more switches, etc) 
> 
> So what would you suggest, what are your experiences? 
> 
> Thanks for any suggestion and feedback . Regards . Götz 
> 


-- 
Götz Reinicke
IT-Koordinator

Tel. +49 7141 969 82 420
E-Mail goetz.reinicke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Filmakademie Baden-Württemberg GmbH
Akademiehof 10
71638 Ludwigsburg
www.filmakademie.de

Eintragung Amtsgericht Stuttgart HRB 205016

Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Jürgen Walter MdL
Staatssekretär im Ministerium für Wissenschaft,
Forschung und Kunst Baden-Württemberg

Geschäftsführer: Prof. Thomas Schadt

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

[Index of Archives]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Ceph Development]     [Ceph Large]     [Ceph Dev]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [xfs]


  Powered by Linux