[TriLUG] NAS box

Brian McCullough bdmc at bdmcc-us.com
Sun May 2 09:29:52 EDT 2004


On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 09:19:25PM -0400, Aaron Joyner wrote:
> Okay, a few things to consider.  First, for this task, I wouldn't 
> suggest OpenBSD, given that (I assume) you already know Linux, but 
> don't know the BSDs.  This task is at least as well performed by Linux, 
> and won't require a steep learning curve for you.

Thank you, Aaron.

You're right, it has been a while since I played on SunOS and Solaris
machines.

My question of architecture had to do with disk-handling and network
efficiency, whether switching architectures might have some benefit.

And yes, very little "bulk" traffic is between the Linux boxes.


Brian

P. S. Incidentally, the point at issue at present is the handling of
some awfully large images, on the order of 1+ Gig apiece, which need to
be handled in pairs.  Aside from just the storage aspect, which was most
of my previous question, I don't really think that I would get much
benefit from loading up the workstations with disk space ( which would
have to be duplicated for each workstation, because the images may be
worked on from anywhere ).

B

> 
> That part of the discussion out of the way, see my other email, which 
> was supposed to start right here, but I seem to have gotten confused.  
> :)
> 
> Aaron "Confused" Joyner
> 
> On May 1, 2004, at 11:21 PM, Brian McCullough wrote:
> 
> >On Sat, May 01, 2004 at 02:36:16PM -0400, Jon Carnes wrote:
> >>OpenBSD version 3.5 has just been released. This is the version that
> >>comes with CARP built into it (built-in firewall failover).
> >
> >
> >REALLY not wanting to start a religious war, but I have a question of
> >Linux vs BSD.
> >
> >
> >I have a client that needs a "disk server" and I was thinking that this
> >might be an opportunity to ask for recommendations.
> >
> >
> >First, of course, there is the basic question of "purpose-built" (
> >commercial box like a Snap Server ) or "home-brew."
> >
> >
> >Then, and this is really my question, if I was to build a box for this
> >purpose, it would probably have the following specifications:
> >
> >LOTS of disk space ( SATA? RAID! )
> >At least one Gigabit Network connection
> >Second network connection, at least 100 MBit.
> >
> >
> >This machine would be plugged into an existing network ( actually two
> >loops, one 100 MBit, one Gigabit, but this box is to a large extent for
> >the Gigabit side ) consisting of a Linux general purpose server ( IMAP,
> >SMTP, DNS, SAMBA, etc. ), a Linux firewall box, and a conglomeration of
> >Win 95, 98, 2K machines. ( also a soon to be dead ( or replaced ) WinMe
> >machine )
> >
> >The big workstations, and the machines making the most use of the new
> >box, are Win2K.
> >
> >
> >Here's your chance to help me design an inexpensive!, big disk array, 
> >to
> >take the load off of the general purpose Linux server.
> >
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Brian
> >
> >-- 
> >TriLUG mailing list        : 
> >http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
> >TriLUG Organizational FAQ  : http://trilug.org/faq/
> >TriLUG Member Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/
> >TriLUG PGP Keyring         : http://trilug.org/~chrish/trilug.asc
> 
> -- 
> TriLUG mailing list        : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
> TriLUG Organizational FAQ  : http://trilug.org/faq/
> TriLUG Member Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/
> TriLUG PGP Keyring         : http://trilug.org/~chrish/trilug.asc
> 



More information about the TriLUG mailing list