67TB in 4U for under $8000

GeorgeHR said:
Perhaps the $800 case includes some of the minor electronics. But custom stuff is expensive.

I have a wooden case for my TV/PC. I hang hard drives from a 1/8" sheet of plywood with holes for the mounting screws. About 1/4" space between drives. Tidy and cheap.
Click to expand...

sorry to be OT, but as soon as I read your post I pictured your case just bursting into flames:p
 
Ockie said:
I had a long post winded up but forget it. Please don't bother responding to my future posts, you clearly have no idea what you are talking about and welcome to my ignore list.
Click to expand...

See my sig, I got tired of all the BS myself!
 
brandinb said:
Back"BLAZE" HEH

Honestly though It is a 5 dollar a month backup service with no guarantees. They do not need enterprise storage and they would never make any money. Everyone who says its a bad design is WRONG. It is a great design for what they do CHEAP backup solution. This is not the only backup solution you would rely on and I don't think its marketed that way. This is just an extra backup for safety.

I think its a great design and 10x cheaper then the enterprise capacity "equivalent"
Click to expand...

This thing is the Chinese Sweat Shop of the storage world.
 
wow who would have thought a blog post showing cheap high density storage would have kicked off a holy war.

Their design did get me thinking. Cutting some of the same corners they did it would be possible to add a second norco for $30-35 per port. The density isn't as great but for my home rack it is fine.
 
Last edited:
Ockie said:
This is really nice. I just wish that they wouldn't compare this product to enterprise products that are proven and have much more performance and options. I don't see how you can compare a consumer hardware based system with non-hot swaps, non redundancy, to a full san solution being offered by EMC or IBM.
Click to expand...

This, plus EMC's call home feature at my office has more than paid for itself now. I personally don't think I would rely on these guys with all of my data.:eek: Cool idea though.
 
I'm quite sure that they're using some middleware and a distributed filesystem to manage all of this raw storage. There are probably 3 copies of every bit of data spread across different red boxes.

Still cheap storage, but not *as* cheap.
 
if you did this setup at your house on your own, how would it be using whs?
 
jtg1993 said:
Wow those are sweet, the problem I see is the shitty sata cards they use. Here are links for the cards.
(3) Syba SD-SA2PEX-2IR
(1) Addonics ADSA4R5
I would love if they made a hardware raid version using an Areca 1680ix-24 and an expander or two, the price would only go up around 2 grand which would still be an awesome price.
Click to expand...

If they were connected to a high-bandwidth SAN, that'd make sense. They're not. Or more's the point, 99% of their customer base isn't. So there's no point in spending $$$ on high-end RAID cards, because they'd see no advantage from it.

The same argument applies to the use of port-multipliers - for SATA II that's 230 out of 300MB/sec. Again, they're not going to see the need for that kind of bandwidth from their customers - people will spend more time uploading than downloading.
 
parityOCP said:
If they were connected to a high-bandwidth SAN, that'd make sense. They're not. Or more's the point, 99% of their customer base isn't. So there's no point in spending $$$ on high-end RAID cards, because they'd see no advantage from it.

The same argument applies to the use of port-multipliers - for SATA II that's 230 out of 300MB/sec. Again, they're not going to see the need for that kind of bandwidth from their customers - people will spend more time uploading than downloading.
Click to expand...

Well, the thing is is that one of the four RAID cards is PCI. That's a MASSIVE bottleneck for that expensive of a system and really shouts "unprofessional" which is unfortunate. The other three cards are PCI-E, so why not find a mobo that supports 4 PCI-E ports?
 
parityOCP said:
If they were connected to a high-bandwidth SAN, that'd make sense. They're not. Or more's the point, 99% of their customer base isn't. So there's no point in spending $$$ on high-end RAID cards, because they'd see no advantage from it.

The same argument applies to the use of port-multipliers - for SATA II that's 230 out of 300MB/sec. Again, they're not going to see the need for that kind of bandwidth from their customers - people will spend more time uploading than downloading.
Click to expand...

I agree, I think it is a good solution to their exact problem. So many people think they need to overbuild everything, that's not always the best solution.
 
I gave up this company weeks ago. Tooooooooooo slow and crappy software are the chief complaints.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top