Re: high density machines

[Paul Evans <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Echoing what Jan said, the 4U Fat Twin is the better choice of the two options, as it is very difficult to get long-term reliable and efficient operation of many OSDs when they are serviced by just one or two CPUs. 

I don’t believe the FatTwin design has much of a backplane, primarily sharing power and cooling. That said: the cost savings would need to be solid to choose the FatTwin over 1U boxes, especially as (personally) I dislike lots of front-side cabling in the rack. 

-- 
Paul Evans

On Sep 3, 2015, at 7:01 AM, Gurvinder Singh <gurvindersinghdahiya@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,

I am wondering if anybody in the community is running ceph cluster with
high density machines e.g. Supermicro SYS-F618H-OSD288P (288 TB),
Supermicro SSG-6048R-OSD432 (432 TB) or some other high density
machines. I am assuming that the installation will be of petabyte scale
as you would want to have at least 3 of these boxes.

It would be good to hear their experiences in terms of reliability,
performance (specially during node failures). As these machines have
40Gbit network connection it can be ok, but experience from real users
would be  great to hear. As these are mentioned in the reference
architecture published by red hat and supermicro.

Thanks for your time.
_______________________________________________
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