Comments on: Apple Mojo In High-End Storage http://storagemojo.com/2006/06/27/apple-mojo-in-high-end-low-cost-storage/ Data storage info & analysis Tue, 15 May 2012 23:44:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Robin Harris http://storagemojo.com/2006/06/27/apple-mojo-in-high-end-low-cost-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-12108 Robin Harris Tue, 19 Dec 2006 13:59:29 +0000 http://storagemojo.com/?p=173#comment-12108 Vladimir, Certainly, for important data you'd want to mirror across both sides of an Xserve RAID. If you don't, then there are several SPOFs. Yet I disagree with you on one point: ZFS DOES bring significant value to low-end hardware - which Xserve RAID is - by enabling pooling, improving data integrity and implementing a solid RAID model, among other things. Robin Vladimir,

Certainly, for important data you’d want to mirror across both sides of an Xserve RAID. If you don’t, then there are several SPOFs.

Yet I disagree with you on one point: ZFS DOES bring significant value to low-end hardware – which Xserve RAID is – by enabling pooling, improving data integrity and implementing a solid RAID model, among other things.

Robin

]]> By: Vladimir Ivanov http://storagemojo.com/2006/06/27/apple-mojo-in-high-end-low-cost-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-12090 Vladimir Ivanov Tue, 19 Dec 2006 06:55:48 +0000 http://storagemojo.com/?p=173#comment-12090 I don't think, zfs will make the system any better. First, if you loose one controller or a cable, you will loos access to 7 disks (there is no path redundancy). If you want keep access to your data, you should build a software RAID on top of the xRAID - but that was possible before zfs - MacOS had software RAID1 implementation at least in 10.2. So, zfs doesn't bring anything for xRAID, sorry. And the device itself is nothing special, seems to be an OEM version of some 2nd tier storage vendor array. I don’t think, zfs will make the system any better. First, if you loose one controller or a cable, you will loos access to 7 disks (there is no path redundancy). If you want keep access to your data, you should build a software RAID on top of the xRAID – but that was possible before zfs – MacOS had software RAID1 implementation at least in 10.2.

So, zfs doesn’t bring anything for xRAID, sorry. And the device itself is nothing special, seems to be an OEM version of some 2nd tier storage vendor array.

]]> By: rocksandwater http://storagemojo.com/2006/06/27/apple-mojo-in-high-end-low-cost-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-6045 rocksandwater Wed, 23 Aug 2006 20:22:28 +0000 http://storagemojo.com/?p=173#comment-6045 Apple will move to SATA/SAS when PATA drives no longer have a cost advantage. XServe RAID might not be "enterprise class", but for many applications, the price/performance is compelling. I'll let Enterprises pay 2x-3x, while I meet my needs. I've got 8 XServe RAIDs and wish I had more. Now, if I could just figure out how to backup a Mac Mini with ten 750 GB Firewire drives attached (under $1K/TB))... Add ZFS and I'd be a very happy camper. YMMV!!!! Apple will move to SATA/SAS when PATA drives no longer have a cost advantage.

XServe RAID might not be “enterprise class”, but for many applications, the price/performance is compelling. I’ll let Enterprises pay 2x-3x, while I meet my needs. I’ve got 8 XServe RAIDs and wish I had more.

Now, if I could just figure out how to backup a Mac Mini with ten 750 GB Firewire drives attached (under $1K/TB))…

Add ZFS and I’d be a very happy camper.

YMMV!!!!

]]> By: Robin Harris http://storagemojo.com/2006/06/27/apple-mojo-in-high-end-low-cost-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-2436 Robin Harris Thu, 29 Jun 2006 19:52:42 +0000 http://storagemojo.com/?p=173#comment-2436 Oops, now I see what Gary Watson was referring to. Start brain before putting mouth in gear. He is correct that the alert reader mis-identified the Xserve RAID controllers as dual redundant. The best I can say is that there are two of them and with ZFS they'd be truly redundant. Oops, now I see what Gary Watson was referring to. Start brain before putting mouth in gear. He is correct that the alert reader mis-identified the Xserve RAID controllers as dual redundant. The best I can say is that there are two of them and with ZFS they’d be truly redundant.

]]> By: Robin Harris http://storagemojo.com/2006/06/27/apple-mojo-in-high-end-low-cost-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-2434 Robin Harris Thu, 29 Jun 2006 19:49:17 +0000 http://storagemojo.com/?p=173#comment-2434 Didn't I say they weren't redundant? Lack of global hot spare means each group of seven needs one unless you like living a little closer to the edge. Frankiy, if your data is mission critical you probably aren't using Xserver RAID anyway. The performance boost from RAID controllers is largely due to the NVRAM write cache, which is already an option on Xserve RAID. So going through the pain of an OEM qualification, which the miserly funding of the Apple storage team wouldn't allow anyway, wouldn't buy them much in performance. It could improve their availability. But not as much ZFS. Didn’t I say they weren’t redundant? Lack of global hot spare means each group of seven needs one unless you like living a little closer to the edge. Frankiy, if your data is mission critical you probably aren’t using Xserver RAID anyway.

The performance boost from RAID controllers is largely due to the NVRAM write cache, which is already an option on Xserve RAID. So going through the pain of an OEM qualification, which the miserly funding of the Apple storage team wouldn’t allow anyway, wouldn’t buy them much in performance. It could improve their availability. But not as much ZFS.

]]> By: Gary Watson http://storagemojo.com/2006/06/27/apple-mojo-in-high-end-low-cost-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-2416 Gary Watson Thu, 29 Jun 2006 17:39:17 +0000 http://storagemojo.com/?p=173#comment-2416 Xserve RAID does NOT have redundant RAID controllers. You have two 7-drive RAID controllers in the same chassis. The definition of redundant RAID controllers is that in the event of a controller failure, the survivor can take ownership of all drives and present their data to the host. In the Xserve RAID, each controller is only connected to 7 of the drives, so if a controller fails, you lose access to the other 7 drives. Period. It's true you can make two 7 drive RAID sets and then mirror them, but now you have only 6 drive's worth of effective capacity with no hot spares even though you paid for 14 drives and a big chassis. Kinda trashes the low cost/GB argument especially if you need No Single Point of Failure. Even if you don't care about this, you still need at least two parity drives and then you don't have a hot spare. If you want a hot spare, you need one for each controller, so now you have 10 drives worth of capacity. Apple could easily OEM any of several fully-featured RAID controllers from Infortrend, Nexsan, or LSI and solve this problem in a few months and get a huge performance boost. Xserve RAID does NOT have redundant RAID controllers. You have two 7-drive RAID controllers in the same chassis. The definition of redundant RAID controllers is that in the event of a controller failure, the survivor can take ownership of all drives and present their data to the host. In the Xserve RAID, each controller is only connected to 7 of the drives, so if a controller fails, you lose access to the other 7 drives. Period. It’s true you can make two 7 drive RAID sets and then mirror them, but now you have only 6 drive’s worth of effective capacity with no hot spares even though you paid for 14 drives and a big chassis. Kinda trashes the low cost/GB argument especially if you need No Single Point of Failure. Even if you don’t care about this, you still need at least two parity drives and then you don’t have a hot spare. If you want a hot spare, you need one for each controller, so now you have 10 drives worth of capacity. Apple could easily OEM any of several fully-featured RAID controllers from Infortrend, Nexsan, or LSI and solve this problem in a few months and get a huge performance boost.

]]> By: web design uk http://storagemojo.com/2006/06/27/apple-mojo-in-high-end-low-cost-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-2395 web design uk Thu, 29 Jun 2006 14:32:33 +0000 http://storagemojo.com/?p=173#comment-2395 Where can I get me some !! Where can I get me some !!

]]> By: Wes Felter http://storagemojo.com/2006/06/27/apple-mojo-in-high-end-low-cost-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-2340 Wes Felter Thu, 29 Jun 2006 03:13:41 +0000 http://storagemojo.com/?p=173#comment-2340 I agree with Robin Harris; let's lose the RAID and replace it with SAS/SATA JBODs at $1K/TB. I agree with Robin Harris; let’s lose the RAID and replace it with SAS/SATA JBODs at $1K/TB.

]]> By: Like Your Work » Blog Archive » links for 2006-06-29 http://storagemojo.com/2006/06/27/apple-mojo-in-high-end-low-cost-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-2310 Like Your Work » Blog Archive » links for 2006-06-29 Thu, 29 Jun 2006 00:28:18 +0000 http://storagemojo.com/?p=173#comment-2310 [...] StorageMojo » Apple Mojo In High-End Storage (tags: zfs) [...] [...] StorageMojo » Apple Mojo In High-End Storage (tags: zfs) [...]

]]> By: Don Smith http://storagemojo.com/2006/06/27/apple-mojo-in-high-end-low-cost-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-2251 Don Smith Wed, 28 Jun 2006 17:30:35 +0000 http://storagemojo.com/?p=173#comment-2251 Good move for Apple. We've seen a slow, methodical move towards gaining market share. 1st getting non-computer consumer product domination with iPod. Followed by gaining back mindshare with consumers with iMacs, Macbooks and Macbook Pros. We are starting to see a bigger push with creative pros (Final Cut, Aperture, Logic Pro, Shake, etc.). In these markets no other company offers such a range of HW & SW. No one comes close. Now if they could just get some business to take a look at them. Maybe this is the "killer app" for business (albiet, not an app) to go along with Mac OS X Server products (HW/SW) and they could have a minor hit.... now if they can only get Pixar to use this stuff :) Good move for Apple. We’ve seen a slow, methodical move towards gaining market share. 1st getting non-computer consumer product domination with iPod. Followed by gaining back mindshare with consumers with iMacs, Macbooks and Macbook Pros. We are starting to see a bigger push with creative pros (Final Cut, Aperture, Logic Pro, Shake, etc.). In these markets no other company offers such a range of HW & SW. No one comes close.

Now if they could just get some business to take a look at them. Maybe this is the “killer app” for business (albiet, not an app) to go along with Mac OS X Server products (HW/SW) and they could have a minor hit…. now if they can only get Pixar to use this stuff :)

]]> By: Tech Meat » Rumor: Apple Enterprise Products to use ZFS http://storagemojo.com/2006/06/27/apple-mojo-in-high-end-low-cost-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-2250 Tech Meat » Rumor: Apple Enterprise Products to use ZFS Wed, 28 Jun 2006 17:27:01 +0000 http://storagemojo.com/?p=173#comment-2250 [...] read more | digg story [...] [...] read more | digg story [...]

]]> By: Robin Harris http://storagemojo.com/2006/06/27/apple-mojo-in-high-end-low-cost-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-2236 Robin Harris Wed, 28 Jun 2006 15:55:32 +0000 http://storagemojo.com/?p=173#comment-2236 Jim, agree that Xserve RAIDs aren't ready for prime time. With ZFS Apple could simply go to JBODs - lose the controllers - and be way ahead of where they are now. And ahead of Vista as well. See today's post, when I get it up. Storage Dude, actually much easier to port ZFS than to build a new file system. And all the RAID hardware goes away - you don't need it. ZFS does "manage" individual disks by simply adding them to the storage pool - which is a Very Good Thing. More on today's post. ZDigital, the smart thing would be to lose the controllers entirely - why spend the money? You might leave the battery backed-up write cache for folks who want every bit of small write performance they can get, but even that would be a small advantage IMHO. Jim, agree that Xserve RAIDs aren’t ready for prime time. With ZFS Apple could simply go to JBODs – lose the controllers – and be way ahead of where they are now. And ahead of Vista as well. See today’s post, when I get it up.

Storage Dude, actually much easier to port ZFS than to build a new file system. And all the RAID hardware goes away – you don’t need it. ZFS does “manage” individual disks by simply adding them to the storage pool – which is a Very Good Thing. More on today’s post.

ZDigital, the smart thing would be to lose the controllers entirely – why spend the money? You might leave the battery backed-up write cache for folks who want every bit of small write performance they can get, but even that would be a small advantage IMHO.

]]> By: OS X Topia » Blog Archive » ZFS on OSX http://storagemojo.com/2006/06/27/apple-mojo-in-high-end-low-cost-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-2226 OS X Topia » Blog Archive » ZFS on OSX Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:59:46 +0000 http://storagemojo.com/?p=173#comment-2226 [...] looks like Sun’s ZFS might be coming to OSX. Read more here. [...] [...] looks like Sun’s ZFS might be coming to OSX. Read more here. [...]

]]> By: Jim http://storagemojo.com/2006/06/27/apple-mojo-in-high-end-low-cost-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-2224 Jim Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:15:01 +0000 http://storagemojo.com/?p=173#comment-2224 "enterprise class"...not quite. I manage 10 Xserves and 15 XRAIDs in an enterprise. They are not enterprise class hardware. The XRaid admin tool is laughable to say the least. buggy, slow, temperamental. And the XRAID is simply two independent RAID devices shoved into one form factor. Why you just can't build one raid 5 volume with both channels is beyond me. “enterprise class”…not quite. I manage 10 Xserves and 15 XRAIDs in an enterprise. They are not enterprise class hardware. The XRaid admin tool is laughable to say the least. buggy, slow, temperamental. And the XRAID is simply two independent RAID devices shoved into one form factor. Why you just can’t build one raid 5 volume with both channels is beyond me.

]]>