[Cialug] Virtual Box and NAS

[Dave Hala Jr]

So... the question is, if we have a Centos 6 file server, with a 1gb
intel nic and a 3ware 8006-4lp sata controller with 4 or so 1.5gb 7200
sata drives in a raid 5 configuration, does a dual Pentium III 1.4 ghz
machine with 2gb of ram have enough horsepower for decent performance?


On Sat, 2011-08-13 at 08:40 -0500, Matthew Nuzum wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 4:53 AM, Dave Hala Jr <dave at 58ghz.net> wrote:
>         Maybe the way to do this would be to pick up a refurb'ed rack
>         mount
>         server with raid and hot swappable drives and just put new
>         drives in it.
>         An older dual xeon server with a gb nic and a 1-2gb of ram has
>         a lot of
>         horsepower.
>         
>         
>         
> 
> 
> I've bought servers from this guy on e-bay a few times and had a 100%
> good experience http://stores.ebay.com/PDNEIMAN?_rdc=1
> 
> 
> He has several machines for under $500 that have more modern Xeon 5xxx
> CPUs. If you do go this route, don't get the older Xeons that don't
> support virtualization, especially considering how inexpensive these
> are. I'm no expert but avoid the ones that say "dual xeon" without
> mentioning the model number.
> 
> 
> I'm speaking from experience on this one. Having virtualization
> support, even if you don't think you'll need it, gives you tons of
> options down the road.
> 
> 
>  
>         
>         On Fri, 2011-08-12 at 15:20 -0500, David Champion wrote:
>         > You would expect that, but some real-world testing of the
>         cheap NAS
>         > boxes shows differently. They use really low-end Marvell
>         imbedded
>         > chipsets.
>         >
>         > You can buy a Dell T110 for about the same price as a soho
>         NAS,
>         > sometimes cheaper. It has a "real" processor, a good Intel
>         gigabit
>         > NIC, and can hold 4 SATA drives, and has an ESATA port. Put
>         your
>         > favorite NAS type OS on it or even just a generic Linux
>         distro, and
>         > it's going to beat the pants off a Netgear or Dlink NAS, and
>         probably
>         > be more stable.
>         >
>         > Google for NAS benchmarks, there are several out there.
>         >
>         > -dc
>         >
>         > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Matthew Nuzum
>         <newz at bearfruit.org>
>         > wrote:
>         >         On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Dave Hala Jr
>         <dave at 58ghz.net>
>         >         wrote:
>         >                 I really doesn't appear that there is much
>         differance
>         >                 between the
>         >                 Readynas 1500 and the entry level
>         Powervaults.
>         >
>         >                 My intent is virtualize about 6 servers and
>         most
>         >                 likely launch the VM's
>         >                 from a central location. They are mostly
>         low-medium
>         >                 traffic webservers.
>         >
>         >                 I'm not against building a server, but ya
>         know, if I
>         >                 can just buy one
>         >                 and plug it in, that's not always a bad
>         thing.  I was
>         >                 hoping to stay
>         >                 around the 1500-3k range. How many people
>         actually
>         >                 build there own rack
>         >                 servers anymore?
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >         I totally agree. I would expect that a GigE
>         connection to a
>         >         RAID array (with presumably fast seek times) should
>         be able to
>         >         approach an IDE drive's performance. I don't know
>         much about
>         >         these NAS's you're mentioning but I've seen a low
>         cost
>         >         consumer device that can NOT saturate the GigE port
>         and seem
>         >         to be bandwidth limited by internal architecture. (<
>         $200
>         >         units)
>         >
>         >
>         >         According
>         >         to
>         http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_ATA#Comparison_to_other_interfaces it suggests that IDE bandwidth just slightly exceeds 1Gb/s. Considering TCP/IP overhead that means you should probably expect slow-ide like performance at best. Probably not a great plan if your VMs need much i/o bandwidth. Fibre channel looks like a better choice if you can get it.
>         >
>         >
>         >         I'll show my inexperience with this question: Is
>         GigE 1Gb/s
>         >         each way (total 2Gb/s) assuming you have a full
>         duplex
>         >         connection? If so then maybe IDE-like performance
>         isn't
>         >         unreasonable to expect.
>         >
>         >
>         >         --
>         >         Matthew Nuzum
>         >         newz2000 on freenode, skype, linkedin and twitter
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >         ♫ You're never fully dressed without a smile! ♫
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >         _______________________________________________
>         >         Cialug mailing list
>         >         Cialug at cialug.org
>         >         http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
>         >
>         >
>         > _______________________________________________
>         > Cialug mailing list
>         > Cialug at cialug.org
>         > http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
>         
>         _______________________________________________
>         Cialug mailing list
>         Cialug at cialug.org
>         http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
>         
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Matthew Nuzum
> newz2000 on freenode, skype, linkedin and twitter
> 
> 
> 
> ♫ You're never fully dressed without a smile! ♫
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Cialug mailing list
> Cialug at cialug.org
> http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug