[Gllug] Anyone using Linux 2.6.0 on production system?

[James Bromberger]

John Hearns (john.hearns at clustervision.com) wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, James Bromberger wrote:
> > Yes, thats 3.5 terabytes in a single partition. Thats why its a 2.6
> > kernel. And its been rock solid (except for 2.6.0-test6 or so). And if
> Nice.
> > this were an optertron I could go to 8 PB, whereas since this is a P4
> > box, I can only go to 16 T. 
> 8 PB?
> Anyone care to work out how big physically an array with 8PB would be,
> using today's 200G disk drives?
> 
> Say something like 4000 4U high arrays??
> That's ten arrays to a rack, so 400 racks.
> And a bloody strong floor to hold it!
> 
> Just thinking outloud, fibrechannel is supposed to scale to that sort
> of size...
> 

Ahhh.. but some of the new rack units are supposed to be 14 disks across
and 3 rows deep for the cost of... what... 4U. 200 GB * 14 * 3 = 8.4T
raw. Two disks as hot spares, and RAID5 the rest? Gives 7.8T per unit. 
SO, for 8 PB, thats 1026 units.  In a 48U high rack, thats 85 racks.

Now, how's luster coming along, because all that storage is no good
unless there is a clustered filesystem? When you have X PB of data, you
don't want to rely on one host to access it.

  James
-- 
 James Bromberger <james_AT_rcpt.to> www.james.rcpt.to
 Remainder moved to http://www.james.rcpt.to/james/sig.html

I am in London on UK mobile +44 7952 042920.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/gllug/attachments/20040115/a8799eac/attachment.pgp>
-------------- next part --------------
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug