3 ms·

Sounds like you are talking from experience. Are you storage specialist, how did you learn so much about this?

• KaiserPro 3y ago
  VFX engineer, I have suffered through: _early_ lustre (its much better now) GPFS Gluster (fuck that) clustered XFS (double fuck that) Isilon Nowadays, a single 2u server can realistically support 2x 100gig nics at full bore. So the biggest barrier is density. You can probably get 1pb in a rack now, and linking a bunch of jbods(well NVMEs) is probably easily to do now.
  • nh2 3y ago
    "1PB in a rack"? You can apparently already buy 2.5PB in a single 4U server: https://www.techradar.com/pro/seagate-has-launched-a-massive-29tb-hard-disk-drive-that-almost-nobody-noticed-but-you-can-only-buy-the-biggest-ever-hdd-in-a-2500tb-storage-device https://www.techradar.com/pro/seagate-has-launched-a-massive...
    • KaiserPro 3y ago
      sorry I should have added a caveat of 1pb _at decent performance_ That seagate array will be fine for streaming (so long as you spread the data properly) as soon as you start mixing read/write loads on that, it'll start to chug. You can expect 70-150iops out of each drive, and thats a 60 drive array (from guess, you can get 72 drives in a 4u, but they are less maintainable, well used to be, thing might have improved recently) When I was using luster with ultra scisi (yes, that long ago) we had good 10-20 racks to get to 100tb, that could sustain 1gigabyte a second.
      • nh2 3y ago
        Agreed, it depends on the use case. For some "more storage" is all that matters, for others you don't want to be bottlenecked on getting it into / out of the machine or through processing.