building it on only one machine... if you want 50gbps, put six (one more) for network access (you need many pci-express slots with 4x(10gbps) or 8x(20gbps)) i use raid10 for redundancy and speed you can do raid1 for redundancy and after raid0,4,5,6 over raid1 devices for better speed sata/sas/raid controllers? sata is very cheap you can use SSD with sata2 interface, sas have fasters (less accestime) hard disks with 10k/15k rpm ram? with more ran = more cache/buffers low disks usage, more read speed cpu? i don't know what to use, but it's a big machine maybe you need servers motherboards (5 pci-express just for network = big motherboard, big motherboard = many cpus) try with only one cpu with 6cores hiperthread, etc. if it's not enought put a second cpu operational system? linux with md =), it's a md list heehhe, maybe a netbsd or freebsd or windows works too file server? nfs, samba filesystem? hummmmmm a cluster fs is good here, but a single ext4, xfs, reiserfs could work, your energy is good? you want jornaling? redundancy/cluster? beowolf openmosix, others. heartbeat, placemark, others. sql database? mysql have ndb for clusters, myisam is fast without some features, innodb is slower with many features, ariadb = myisam but slower to write with fail safe feature. oracle is good but mysql is low resource consuming. postgres is nice too, maybe you app will tell you what to use network? many 10gbit with bounding(linux module) on round robin or another good(working) loadbalance 2011/2/17 Roberto Spadim <roberto@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > with more network cards = more network gbps > with better (faster) rams = more disks reads > with more raid0/4/5/6 = more speed on disks reads > with more raid1 mirrors = more security > with more sas/sata/raid controllers = more GB/TB on storage > with more anything ~= more money > just know what numbers you want and make it work > > 2011/2/17 John Robinson <john.robinson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >> On 14/02/2011 23:59, Matt Garman wrote: >> [...] >>> >>> The requirement is basically this: around 40 to 50 compute machines >>> act as basically an ad-hoc scientific compute/simulation/analysis >>> cluster. These machines all need access to a shared 20 TB pool of >>> storage. Each compute machine has a gigabit network connection, and >>> it's possible that nearly every machine could simultaneously try to >>> access a large (100 to 1000 MB) file in the storage pool. In other >>> words, a 20 TB file store with bandwidth upwards of 50 Gbps. >> >> I'd recommend you analyse that requirement more closely. Yes, you have 50 >> compute machines with GigE connections so it's possible they could all >> demand data from the file store at once, but in actual use, would they? >> >> For example, if these machines were each to demand a 100MB file, how long >> would they spend computing their results from it? If it's only 1 second, >> then you would indeed need an aggregate bandwidth of 50Gbps[1]. If it's 20 >> seconds processing, your filer only needs an aggregate bandwidth of 2.5Gbps. >> >> So I'd recommend you work out first how much data the compute machines can >> actually chew through and work up from there, rather than what their network >> connections could stream through and work down. >> >> Cheers, >> >> John. >> >> [1] I'm assuming the compute nodes are fetching the data for the next >> compute cycle while they're working on this one; if they're not you're >> likely making unnecessary demands on your filer while leaving your compute >> nodes idle. >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> > > > > -- > Roberto Spadim > Spadim Technology / SPAEmpresarial > -- Roberto Spadim Spadim Technology / SPAEmpresarial -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
