Hi Jake, On 19-09-17 15:14, Jake Young wrote: > Ideally you actually want fewer disks per server and more servers. > This has been covered extensively in this mailing list. Rule of thumb > is that each server should have 10% or less of the capacity of your > cluster. That's very true, but let's focus on the HBA. > I didn't do extensive research to decide on this HBA, it's simply what > my server vendor offered. There are probably better, faster, cheaper > HBAs out there. A lot of people complain about LSI HBAs, but I am > comfortable with them. Given a configuration our vendor offered it's about LSI/Avago 9300-8i with 8 drives connected individually using SFF8087 on a backplane (e.g. not an expander). Or, 24 drives using three HBAs (6xSFF8087 in total) when using a 4HE SuperMicro chassis with 24 drive bays. But, what are the LSI complaints about? Or, are the complaints generic to HBAs and/or cryptic CLI tools and not LSI specific? > There is a management tool called storcli that can fully configure the > HBA in one or two command lines. There's a command that configures > all attached disks as individual RAID0 disk groups. That command gets > run by salt when I provision a new osd server. The thread I read was about Areca in JBOD but still able to utilise the cache, if I'm not mistaken. I'm not sure anymore if there was something mentioned about BBU. > > What many other people are doing is using the least expensive JBOD HBA > or the on board SAS controller in JBOD mode and then using SSD > journals. Save the money you would have spent on the fancy HBA for > fast, high endurance SSDs. Thanks! And obviously I'm very interested in other comments as well. Regards, Kees _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |