We also got one of those too. I think the cabling on the front and limited I/O options deterred us, otherwise, I really liked that box too. On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Nick Fisk <nick@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I went for something similar to the Quantas boxes but 4 stacked in 1x 4U box > > http://www.supermicro.nl/products/system/4U/F617/SYS-F617H6-FTPT_.cfm > > When you do the maths, even something like a banana pi + disk starts costing > a similar amount and you get so much more for your money in temrs of > processing power, NIC bandwidth...etc > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of >> Robert LeBlanc >> Sent: 13 April 2015 17:27 >> To: Jerker Nyberg >> Cc: ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Subject: Re: low power single disk nodes >> >> We are getting ready to put the Quantas into production. We looked at the >> Supermico Atoms (we have 6 of them), the rails were crap (they exploded >> the first time you pull the server out, and they stick out of the back of > the >> cabinet about 8 inches, these boxes are already very deep), we also ran > out >> of CPU on these boxes and had limited PCI I/O). >> They may work fine for really cold data. It may also work fine with XIO > and >> Infiniband. The Atoms still had pretty decent performance given these >> limitations. >> >> The Quantas removed some of the issues with NUMA, had much better PCI >> I/O bandwidth, comes with a 10 Gb NIC on board. The biggest drawback is >> that 8 drives is on a SAS controller and 4 drives are on a SATA > controller, plus >> SATADOM and a free port. So you have to manage two different controller >> types and speeds (6Gb SAS and 3Gb SATA). >> >> I'd say neither is perfect, but we decided on Quanta in the end. >> >> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 5:17 AM, Jerker Nyberg <jerker@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >> > >> > Hello, >> > >> > Thanks for all replies! The Banana Pi could work. The built in >> > SATA-power in Banana Pi can power a 2.5" SATA disk. Cool. (Not 3.5" >> > SATA since that seem to require 12 V too.) >> > >> > I found this post from Vess Bakalov about the same subject: >> > http://millibit.blogspot.se/2015/01/ceph-pi-adding-osd-and-more-perfor >> > mance.html >> > >> > For PoE I have only found Intel Galileo Gen 2 or RouterBOARD RB450G >> > which are too slow and/or miss IO-expansion. (But good for >> > signage/Xibo maybe!) >> > >> > I found two boxes from Quanta and SuperMicro with single socket Xeon >> > or with Intel Atom (Avaton) that might be quite ok. I was only aware >> > of the dual-Xeons before. >> > >> > http://www.quantaqct.com/Product/Servers/Rackmount- >> Servers/STRATOS-S10 >> > 0-L11SL-p151c77c70c83 >> > http://www.supermicro.nl/products/system/1U/5018/SSG-5018A- >> AR12L.cfm >> > >> > Kind regards, >> > Jerker Nyberg >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, 9 Apr 2015, Quentin Hartman wrote: >> > >> >> I'm skeptical about how well this would work, but a Banana Pi might >> >> be a place to start. Like a raspberry pi, but it has a SATA connector: >> >> http://www.bananapi.org/ >> >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 3:18 AM, Jerker Nyberg <jerker@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> >> >>> Hello ceph users, >> >>> >> >>> Is anyone running any low powered single disk nodes with Ceph now? >> >>> Calxeda >> >>> seems to be no more according to Wikipedia. I do not think HP >> >>> moonshot is what I am looking for - I want stand-alone nodes, not >> >>> server cartridges integrated into server chassis. And I do not want >> >>> to be locked to a single vendor. >> >>> >> >>> I was playing with Raspberry Pi 2 for signage when I thought of my >> >>> old experiments with Ceph. >> >>> >> >>> I am thinking of for example Odroid-C1 or Odroid-XU3 Lite or maybe >> >>> something with a low-power Intel x64/x86 processor. Together with >> >>> one SSD or one low power HDD the node could get all power via PoE >> >>> (via splitter or integrated into board if such boards exist). PoE >> >>> provide remote power-on power-off even for consumer grade nodes. >> >>> >> >>> The cost for a single low power node should be able to compete with >> >>> traditional PC-servers price per disk. Ceph take care of redundancy. >> >>> >> >>> I think simple custom casing should be good enough - maybe just >> >>> strap or velcro everything on trays in the rack, at least for the > nodes with >> SSD. >> >>> >> >>> Kind regards, >> >>> -- >> >>> Jerker Nyberg, Uppsala, Sweden. >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> 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
 |