Comments on: Tiny server clusters http://storagemojo.com/2009/12/06/tiny-server-clusters/ Data storage info & analysis Tue, 07 Sep 2010 17:31:25 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Robin Harris http://storagemojo.com/2009/12/06/tiny-server-clusters/comment-page-1/#comment-207365 Robin Harris Mon, 28 Dec 2009 20:24:34 +0000 http://storagemojo.com/?p=1717#comment-207365 Richard, to change perceptions of such systems they need to present obvious benefits that standard systems don't. And they probably can't be sold through a direct sales force either. Wes, who says the software has to be expensive? Think of a micro-cluster as an appliance with bundled software in an entry-level 3 node cluster. Make more money selling add-on nodes. Robin Richard, to change perceptions of such systems they need to present obvious benefits that standard systems don’t. And they probably can’t be sold through a direct sales force either.

Wes, who says the software has to be expensive? Think of a micro-cluster as an appliance with bundled software in an entry-level 3 node cluster. Make more money selling add-on nodes.

Robin

]]> By: Wes Felter http://storagemojo.com/2009/12/06/tiny-server-clusters/comment-page-1/#comment-207013 Wes Felter Mon, 07 Dec 2009 19:43:52 +0000 http://storagemojo.com/?p=1717#comment-207013 Storage clustering is a really attractive idea in theory, but somehow it doesn't work out on the low end. Expensive clustering software always cancels out the savings from scale-out hardware. Of course, software pricing is somewhat arbitrary so it could change overnight. Storage clustering is a really attractive idea in theory, but somehow it doesn’t work out on the low end. Expensive clustering software always cancels out the savings from scale-out hardware. Of course, software pricing is somewhat arbitrary so it could change overnight.

]]> By: Richard Elling http://storagemojo.com/2009/12/06/tiny-server-clusters/comment-page-1/#comment-207012 Richard Elling Mon, 07 Dec 2009 18:39:48 +0000 http://storagemojo.com/?p=1717#comment-207012 This reminds me of the Sun Fire B1600 strategy, circa 2004. And to some degree, this is the idea behind Sun's Niagara processor line. Lots of wimpy processors in a small space using little power. Sun offered two blades which used x86 processors (AMD Mobile Athlon or Intel low power Xeon) and supported Linux. Even if such systems were dirt cheap, it is not clear that they could garner any market share -- people like Ferraris better than they like bicycles. What would change this perception in the market? This reminds me of the Sun Fire B1600 strategy, circa 2004. And to some degree, this is the idea behind Sun’s Niagara processor line. Lots of wimpy processors in a small space using little power. Sun offered two blades which used x86 processors (AMD Mobile Athlon or Intel low power Xeon) and supported Linux. Even if such systems were dirt cheap, it is not clear that they could garner any market share — people like Ferraris better than they like bicycles. What would change this perception in the market?

]]>