|
Home > Archive > Data Storage > June 2007 > SAS / SATA RAID to Fibre?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
SAS / SATA RAID to Fibre?
|
|
|
| Does anyone make a standalone 1U or 2U rackmount device that does RAID 5 and
6 for SATA or SAS drives, and exposes the logical drive upstream by fibre
channel?
I'm wanting to use one of these per server, so space is an issue and a full
on RAID controller with added separate cabinet for SAS or SATA is a) too
expensive and b) too big.
--
Will
| |
| Nate Carlson 2007-06-17, 1:14 pm |
| On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 21:41:36 -0700, Will wrote:
> Does anyone make a standalone 1U or 2U rackmount device that does RAID 5
> and 6 for SATA or SAS drives, and exposes the logical drive upstream by
> fibre channel?
Lots of companies do! My personal favorite is the NexSan SATABlade
(http://www.nexsan.com).. 8 drives in 1U, supports all the usual RAID
levels (0,1,0+1,4,5,6). I've got one with 8 500gb's in it; works great.
> I'm wanting to use one of these per server, so space is an issue and a
> full on RAID controller with added separate cabinet for SAS or SATA is
> a) too expensive and b) too big.
Makes good sense!
--
nc
| |
|
| "Nate Carlson" <usenet@natecarlson.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.06.17.17.00.38@natecarlson.com...
> On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 21:41:36 -0700, Will wrote:
>
> Lots of companies do! My personal favorite is the NexSan SATABlade
> (http://www.nexsan.com).. 8 drives in 1U, supports all the usual RAID
> levels (0,1,0+1,4,5,6). I've got one with 8 500gb's in it; works great.
Nexsan costs a fortune. I'm looking for something that is commodity.
>
> Makes good sense!
As long as the enclosure doesn't cost five times what the server itself
costs. 
--
Will
| |
|
| On Jun 18, 2:51 pm, "Will" <westes-...@noemail.nospam> wrote:
> Nexsan costs a fortune. I'm looking for something that is commodity.
Well, a SATAblade is probably as cheap a fiber RAID array as you're
ever going to find.
The cost could probably be reduced somewhat by buying smaller/cheaper
drives.
> As long as the enclosure doesn't cost five times what the server itself
> costs.
>
Keep in mind that fiber channel technology IS expensive, across the
board.
It is not really for the hobbyist.
What are you planning on using it for?
> --
> Will
| |
|
| On Jun 18, 2:51 pm, "Will" <westes-...@noemail.nospam> wrote:
> Nexsan costs a fortune. I'm looking for something that is commodity.
Well, a SATAblade is probably as cheap a fiber RAID array as you're
ever going to find.
The cost could probably be reduced somewhat by buying smaller/cheaper
drives.
> As long as the enclosure doesn't cost five times what the server itself
> costs.
>
Keep in mind that fiber channel technology IS expensive, across the
board.
It is not really for the hobbyist.
What are you planning on using it for?
> --
> Will
| |
|
| "Knut" <knutmeidal@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182205509.741204.246030@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 18, 2:51 pm, "Will" <westes-...@noemail.nospam> wrote:
>
>
> Well, a SATAblade is probably as cheap a fiber RAID array as you're
> ever going to find.
> The cost could probably be reduced somewhat by buying smaller/cheaper
> drives.
>
>
>
> Keep in mind that fiber channel technology IS expensive, across the
> board.
> It is not really for the hobbyist.
> What are you planning on using it for?
Pretty hard to compete against Compaq and Dell SCSI to RAID cabinets selling
for $200/each on eBay and the drives in trays going under $100/each.
A typical install for us would be two separate fibre cards in a server, each
connected to hard RAID in a dedicated fibre array, then mirrored across the
arrays using Windows software mirrors. Extremely redundant configuration,
and it's very convenient to take each array offline for maintenance with no
effect to service levels. But each one of those arrays is 4U high, and
the SCSI drives are energy pigs.
I would very much like to convert these installs over to SATA (for low
utilization servers) and SAS (for database and high utilization server), but
to get back space and also to save energy. But I'm not going to spend
$3K per cabinet to get back $400 in energy costs. And experience shows it
does commoditize given time.
--
Will
| |
| Nik Simpson 2007-06-19, 1:14 am |
| Will wrote:
> And experience shows it does commoditize given time.
>
Your experience with Fibre Channel must be limited ;-)
--
Nik Simpson
| |
|
| "Nik Simpson" <n_simpson@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:TEFdi.1183$X8.994@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
> Will wrote:
> Your experience with Fibre Channel must be limited ;-)
Well, some aspects of fibre commoditized. You can certainly get the 1 Gbps
fibre switches for next to nothing. 2 Gbps still holds a premium, but the
smaller port-count 8 and 16 port Brocades are not going to break any
budgets.
I'm starting to see fibre to SATA JBOD cabinets go used under $1K each, but
still haven't seen that happening with RAID.
On a low-utilization server, most people would simply stick in a few SCSI
devices on the server and use a hardware RAID controller. I'm trying to
build additional layers into the system so hardware RAID is done off the
computer and there are no single paths of failure from the adapters, the
fibre networks, or the RAID boxes. None of our applications have more than
10 simultaneous users, so performance really isn't a primary consideration.
And we are not generating $100K of revenue every hour on these things and I
have to cost justify what is basically a convenience and a way to increase
service levels from one nine (99.9%) to two nines (99.99%).
What I want may not exist and that's okay, just checking.
--
Will
| |
|
| In article <zu-dnaCCc5aUr-rbnZ2dnUVZ_o6gnZ2d@giganews.com>,
westes-usc@noemail.nospam says...
>
>"Nik Simpson" <n_simpson@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>news:TEFdi.1183$X8.994@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
>
>Well, some aspects of fibre commoditized. You can certainly get the 1 Gbps
>fibre switches for next to nothing. 2 Gbps still holds a premium, but the
>smaller port-count 8 and 16 port Brocades are not going to break any
>budgets.
>
>I'm starting to see fibre to SATA JBOD cabinets go used under $1K each, but
>still haven't seen that happening with RAID.
>
>On a low-utilization server, most people would simply stick in a few SCSI
>devices on the server and use a hardware RAID controller. I'm trying to
>build additional layers into the system so hardware RAID is done off the
>computer and there are no single paths of failure from the adapters, the
>fibre networks, or the RAID boxes. None of our applications have more than
>10 simultaneous users, so performance really isn't a primary consideration.
>And we are not generating $100K of revenue every hour on these things and I
>have to cost justify what is basically a convenience and a way to increase
>service levels from one nine (99.9%) to two nines (99.99%).
>
>What I want may not exist and that's okay, just checking.
>
Infortrend, Xyratex & Promise (the 3 leading white box RAID manufacturers)
make 12-16 bay, single & dual controller, SAS/SATA-4Gb Fibre Channel RAID
enclosures that integrators (like us) use to make RAID to customer's specs
Nexsan makes a good box but it's a little bit more $$ & I don't think
they have 2Gb, not 4Gb Fibre like most of the others
We even have a line of inexpensive / white box SAS JBOD enclosures
that are used as either expansion boxes for RAIDs or to connect PCI
based boards to
_____ . .
' \\ . . |>>
O// . . |
\_\ . . |
| | . . . |
/ | . www.EvenEnterprises.com . . . |
/ .| info@EvenEnterprises.com . . . |
/ . | 310-544-9439 / 310-544-9309 fax . . . o
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorized - DIRECT VAR/VAD/Distributor for new mid-high end storage
iSCSI/NAS/SAN/RAID from EMC, HP, Equallogic, Quantum, OverLand Storage
| |
| Nik Simpson 2007-06-19, 7:14 am |
| Will wrote:
> "Nik Simpson" <n_simpson@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:TEFdi.1183$X8.994@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
>
> Well, some aspects of fibre commoditized. You can certainly get the 1 Gbps
> fibre switches for next to nothing.
Not because they are a commodity, it's because they are obsolete, a
rather different phenomenon.
> 2 Gbps still holds a premium, but the
> smaller port-count 8 and 16 port Brocades are not going to break any
> budgets.
Still not commodity, just very small, and even then when purchased new
they are expensive compared to say 1Gbit Ethernet which *IS* commodotized.
>
> I'm starting to see fibre to SATA JBOD cabinets go used under $1K each, but
> still haven't seen that happening with RAID.
New, or on Ebay?
>
> On a low-utilization server, most people would simply stick in a few SCSI
> devices on the server and use a hardware RAID controller. I'm trying to
> build additional layers into the system so hardware RAID is done off the
> computer and there are no single paths of failure from the adapters, the
> fibre networks, or the RAID boxes.
You might do better looking at iSCSI for this type of application.
--
Nik Simpson
| |
|
| In article <ulOdi.401$ra.326@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, n_simpson@bellsouth.net
says...
>
>Will wrote:
Gbps[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>
>
>Not because they are a commodity, it's because they are obsolete, a
>rather different phenomenon.
>
>
>
>
>Still not commodity, just very small, and even then when purchased new
>they are expensive compared to say 1Gbit Ethernet which *IS* commodotized.
>
>
>
>New, or on Ebay?
>
>
Qlogic switches start at about $3k for 10 4Gb ports
& the reason that 1Gb switches are so cheap is that 1Gb FC was such
a misery to make interoperable w/ disparate components
the best part about 2Gb (& now 4Gb) FC is that everything is so interoperable
_____ . .
' \\ . . |>>
O// . . |
\_\ . . |
| | . . . |
/ | . www.EvenEnterprises.com . . . |
/ .| info@EvenEnterprises.com . . . |
/ . | 310-544-9439 / 310-544-9309 fax . . . o
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorized - DIRECT VAR/VAD/Distributor for new mid-high end storage
iSCSI/NAS/SAN/RAID from EMC, HP, Equallogic, Quantum, OverLand Storage
| |
|
| "Nik Simpson" <n_simpson@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:ulOdi.401$ra.326@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
Gbps[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Not because they are a commodity, it's because they are obsolete, a
> rather different phenomenon.
You are a victim of marketing. Someone tells you 2 gbps fibre channel is
"obsolete" and so you don't go there anymore and pay premium dollars for the
latest technology. I simply observe real application requirements. And
frankly for many low-use servers, we wouldn't push 1 Gbps of fibre storage
throughput on our highest use day. For a consumer with low performance
requirements, either of the two generations of fibre prior to 4 Gbps work
well enough to do the job that needs to be done.
>
> Still not commodity, just very small, and even then when purchased new
> they are expensive compared to say 1Gbit Ethernet which *IS* commodotized.
To put numbers around that, a typical Brocade 1 Gbps product like the 2250
switch you see going on eBay used for $50 to $150. The 16 port 3800 2 Gbps
switches you see going around $600 to $800. So the 1 Gbps switches are
essentially free and the real cost is your time and materials to make them
work for your application. The 2 Gbps products - if you dedicate about
four ports per target server - end up costing about $150 to $200 per server.
Either choice looks cheap to me.
but[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> New, or on Ebay?
Used or surplus product, of course.
SCSI[vbcol=seagreen]
to[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> You might do better looking at iSCSI for this type of application.
Most of the messages about iSCSI I see posted make me think that maybe iSCSI
is still in beta. I've fallen too many times into the trap of buying
what looks cheap up front and end up losing a ton of money on the back end
making it work. Maybe when iSCSI becomes plug and play I would reconsider.
For my tastes, fibre is proven, is easy enough to make work, and is now
quite cheap. Once SAS gets commoditized, and someone releases a high
volume low cost SATA RAID to fibre solution, we'll have something that is
energy efficient (i.e., low cost to operate 24x7), space efficient, and
cheap. At that point every server in my shop would have redundant
connections to two such boxes. For now I guess I'll keep dreaming.
--
Will
| |
| Nik Simpson 2007-06-19, 7:14 pm |
| Will wrote:
> "Nik Simpson" <n_simpson@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:ulOdi.401$ra.326@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
> Gbps
>
> You are a victim of marketing. Someone tells you 2 gbps fibre channel is
> "obsolete" and so you don't go there anymore and pay premium dollars for the
> latest technology. I simply observe real application requirements. And
> frankly for many low-use servers, we wouldn't push 1 Gbps of fibre storage
> throughput on our highest use day. For a consumer with low performance
> requirements, either of the two generations of fibre prior to 4 Gbps work
> well enough to do the job that needs to be done.
No, I'm not a victim of marketing, I'm just saying that the reason you
can pick up cheap 1Gbit FC is because nobody makes it anymore and it is
seen as having little resale value. That does not mean it is
commodotized, it just means its old.
> Once SAS gets commoditized, and someone releases a high
> volume low cost SATA RAID to fibre solution, we'll have something that is
> energy efficient (i.e., low cost to operate 24x7), space efficient, and
> cheap.
Whatever else that low-cost SATA-Fibre array will be, it will not be
1Gbit FC and you'll be on your own attaching it to old 1Gbit FC
switches. Also, what do you consider low cost everything you've said so
far indicates that you like to acquire used technology at knockdown
prices, nothing wrong with that, but you'll never see new products get
down to those prices.
--
Nik Simpson
| |
|
| "Nik Simpson" <n_simpson@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:46784E38.9070800@bellsouth.net...
> No, I'm not a victim of marketing, I'm just saying that the reason you can
> pick up cheap 1Gbit FC is because nobody makes it anymore and it is seen
> as having little resale value. That does not mean it is commodotized, it
> just means its old.
Fair enough. Personally even for someone trying to save pennies I would go
for 2 Gbps switches and HBAs just because they interoperate with less work.
>
> Whatever else that low-cost SATA-Fibre array will be, it will not be 1Gbit
> FC and you'll be on your own attaching it to old 1Gbit FC switches. Also,
> what do you consider low cost everything you've said so far indicates that
> you like to acquire used technology at knockdown prices, nothing wrong
> with that, but you'll never see new products get down to those prices.
I would be using any SAS / SATA with 2 Gbps Brocade switches, but I wasn't
clear about that before.
As far as commoditization, it seems to be happening faster and faster with
each new generation of technology.
--
Will
|
|
|
|
|