[Cialug] Virtual Box and NAS

[William Christensen]

If you have the money, look at QNAP. But I'm with David, for the price  
and performance building your own is really the way to go. I'm curious  
if there is a noticeable difference in power consumption though.

-Will

On Aug 12, 2011, at 4:20 PM, 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cialug.org/pipermail/cialug/attachments/20110812/89c35c2f/attachment.html>