(This might show up twice) We are getting ready to stand up a 30+TB GIS app and I was wondering if anyone on the list has done something like this on a filer. The guy who will be running this doesn't think a filer would give him the performance required (not specified) and is also concerned that the parity drives will get beat to hard. He has been told by others that the only way to make this work as needed is to use RAID 1+0. This started out being required for all of the data but has been relaxed to just the indexes and current point of interest data. Any thoughts?
Mike Miller General Dynamics Information Technology Michael.Miller.ctr@ustranscom.mil Michael.Miller@gdit.com Phone: 618-229-1185
Has anyone explained or showed this person a write-up on WAFL and NetApp's implementation of RAID-4 and now RAID-DP? ...how NetApp's version does not have a "hot" parity disk as all disks are excersized about the same? ...how RAID-DP is superior to RAID 1+0 and in an edge case is even better (if you loose the same disk in both plexs of a RAID 1, you have total data loss...you can loose any two disks with RAID-DP and loose nothing) ...how RAID-DP has very little overhead compared to NetApp's RAID-4? ...how NetApp's RAID-4 is faster than most hardware RAID arrays?
I could go on, and on, an on....(ask others that know me...plus 10 years at netapp helped)
As an Oracle DBA, I love love love snapmirror. a backup solution that anyone could implement and use to save their butt when they are trying to safely manage a 30 TByte backup.
Every recovery I have performed with snapshot'd files, was simply a "warm recovery" and very easy to oversee.
tmac wrote:
Has anyone explained or showed this person a write-up on WAFL and NetApp's implementation of RAID-4 and now RAID-DP? ...how NetApp's version does not have a "hot" parity disk as all disks are excersized about the same? ...how RAID-DP is superior to RAID 1+0 and in an edge case is even better (if you loose the same disk in both plexs of a RAID 1, you have total data loss...you can loose any two disks with RAID-DP and loose nothing) ...how RAID-DP has very little overhead compared to NetApp's RAID-4? ...how NetApp's RAID-4 is faster than most hardware RAID arrays?
I could go on, and on, an on....(ask others that know me...plus 10 years at netapp helped)
OK, 30 TB is one side of the story - the number of I/Os you'll throw on the storage box is the other.
Having 30TB Data - so what (despite the bu - I agree). But having a big server working hard with the db - that's the challenge!
So what load do you expect?
JUS
-------- Original-Nachricht -------- Datum: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 13:45:50 -0800 Von: Joseph Bishop jbishop@west.net An: tmac tmacmd@gmail.com CC: "Miller, Michael CTR USTRANSCOM J2" michael.miller.ctr@ustranscom.mil, toasters@mathworks.com Betreff: Re: Large Oracle database question
As an Oracle DBA, I love love love snapmirror. a backup solution that anyone could implement and use to save their butt when they are trying to safely manage a 30 TByte backup.
Every recovery I have performed with snapshot'd files, was simply a "warm recovery" and very easy to oversee.
tmac wrote:
Has anyone explained or showed this person a write-up on WAFL and NetApp's implementation of RAID-4 and now RAID-DP? ...how NetApp's version does not have a "hot" parity disk as all disks are excersized about the same? ...how RAID-DP is superior to RAID 1+0 and in an edge case is even better (if you loose the same disk in both plexs of a RAID 1, you have total data loss...you can loose any two disks with RAID-DP and loose nothing) ...how RAID-DP has very little overhead compared to NetApp's RAID-4? ...how NetApp's RAID-4 is faster than most hardware RAID arrays?
I could go on, and on, an on....(ask others that know me...plus 10 years at netapp helped)
-
Joseph Bishop -
jus -
Miller, Michael CTR USTRANSCOM J2 -
tmac