[159672] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Netflow Nfsen Server Hardware
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Pavel Kislinger)
Thu Jan 17 13:21:50 2013
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 17:19:23 +0100
From: Pavel Kislinger <kislinger@kn.vutbr.cz>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <CAJAdsD=6T=48bhCZ633YkxR5hvYTJXAw+=8xmUpn8nL6wb7wqA@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Better IO controller(H700) with his NVcache will make a great job.
Especially if you have more SAS disks and some SSD. For nfdump is much
better a big SAS array build from six or more 900GB SAS HDD in RAID 5
(10k 2.5'' disks are good for this task).
Pavel
On 17.1.2013 17:04, PC wrote:
> I agree here with Christopher; A SSD to handle the high IOPS requirements
> of real time data logging; combined with a scheduled transfer which can
> "move" the stored data in a linear large block copy operation to ordinary
> spindles, would be a cost effective hybrid solution.
>
> This of course is assuming the application can handle this separation of
> data; and I know nothing about Nfsen
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 9:01 AM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 9:05 AM, Joe Loiacono <jloiacon@csc.com> wrote:
>>> Tim Calvin <tcalvin@tlsn.net> wrote on 01/16/2013 05:51:11 PM:
>>>
>>>> PowerEdge R610 -
>>>>
>>>> 2x Intel E5540, 2.53GHz Quad Core Processor
>>>>
>>>> 32GB RAM
>>>>
>>>> 2x 300gb 10k 2.5" SAS HDD
>>> Since netflow processing is generally I/O bound, you may want to invest
>> in
>>> 15K drives.
>> I had suggested off-list that perhaps primary storage as SSD was a
>> better path, is there a reason to not do that? (with some larger
>> storage on spinning-media for historical storage/query).
>>
>>
