Consumer SSD instead of SAS

dsystem

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 6, 2009
Messages
136
This may belong elsewhere but the main topic is storage for enterprise servers.
So we are adding new servers at work for SQL and Microsoft Dynamics.

The quotes for storage I have received from Dell, IBM, HP, and Lenovo are just silly.
$1k for 960 GB SAS HDD
$500 for 120 GB SSD ( I think its SATA MLC to boot)

I am thinking:
A.) They are inflating the prices hoping most IT guys won't say anything, or don't know any better
B.) The SSD's are SLC
C.) It’s “business class” so it automatically costs more.
So are SAS drives really worth the price premium?
I looked at Wikipedia and for SAS vs SATA it looks like I am really just giving up error correction, dual ports, and queue depth.
We are a small IT shop and I am seriously considering building the servers ourselves.
I feel we could handle any hardware issues that may come up, and with the Samsung 840 EVO 1TB SSD's now at $499 we could buy two for the price of the 960 GB SAS HDD; an in the box spare, so any failures could be immediately replaced.
How fast does a degraded raid array repair with SSD?
Has anyone built their own servers with a consumer SSD?
Obviously some businesses have, I mean how could SuperMicro have such a deep portfolio of solutions and still be in business.
 
A.) They are inflating the prices hoping most IT guys won't say anything, or don't know any better
B.) The SSD's are SLC
C.) It’s “business class” so it automatically costs more.
  1. Yes, has been done for years with not much justification.
  2. Actually, most I watch or see are MLC.
  3. Yes, see response #1

So are SAS drives really worth the price premium?
I looked at Wikipedia and for SAS vs SATA it looks like I am really just giving up error correction, dual ports, and queue depth.
SAS is best for enterprise or where heavy needs exist.

We are a small IT shop and I am seriously considering building the servers ourselves.
I feel we could handle any hardware issues that may come up, and with the Samsung 840 EVO 1TB SSD's now at $499 we could buy two for the price of the 960 GB SAS HDD; an in the box spare, so any failures could be immediately replaced.
I have been building my own for years and will keep doing so. The trick is knowing when to stop and move to a off-the-shelf job. I used the OTS servers for clients who are likely to be a pain in arse or those who have per-concieved ideas of it being better with a brand-name.
As for the SSD's I use, Intel and Samsung Pro's ONLY. I don't touch or trust any drive aimed at consumers. I always use them in mirrors with AHCI but if on HW RAID then I aim for the Sammy's with their foreground GC.

How fast does a degraded raid array repair with SSD?
Bloody fast if the RAID controller is good and can handle them. (That is a hint there)


Has anyone built their own servers with a consumer SSD?
Already answered above.
 
I really wish the 840 Pros came in bigger sizes. I have a feeling there are some new Samsung SSD's on the horizon.

What does your failure rate with SSD's look like?
I only know of one that has failed and it was one I bought for a friend, so I do not know how it was treated.
 
This may belong elsewhere but the main topic is storage for enterprise servers.
So we are adding new servers at work for SQL and Microsoft Dynamics.

The quotes for storage I have received from Dell, IBM, HP, and Lenovo are just silly.
$1k for 960 GB SAS HDD
$500 for 120 GB SSD ( I think its SATA MLC to boot)

I am thinking:
A.) They are inflating the prices hoping most IT guys won't say anything, or don't know any better
B.) The SSD's are SLC
C.) It’s “business class” so it automatically costs more.
So are SAS drives really worth the price premium?
I looked at Wikipedia and for SAS vs SATA it looks like I am really just giving up error correction, dual ports, and queue depth.
We are a small IT shop and I am seriously considering building the servers ourselves.
I feel we could handle any hardware issues that may come up, and with the Samsung 840 EVO 1TB SSD's now at $499 we could buy two for the price of the 960 GB SAS HDD; an in the box spare, so any failures could be immediately replaced.
How fast does a degraded raid array repair with SSD?
Has anyone built their own servers with a consumer SSD?
Obviously some businesses have, I mean how could SuperMicro have such a deep portfolio of solutions and still be in business.

I work in a small group of IT guys, and i build all our servers, and i use "Consumer" SSD's all the time,I recently built a Server with 4 of these http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147193 (512Gb model not the 256) in RAID5.

SAS drives are also good, but the Cost can be a deal breaker, and im finding most clients are becoming somewhat tech "Savy" and like having SSD's now anyway.and its a selling point. my only concern is the amount of R/W the drives will see, i have only 2 servers in play with more than 2 years service and have SSD's, but so far so good.
 
I am not sure if the old thought process of r/w on a ssd is accurate anymore. Certainly they have a limited number of writes but the onboard controllers have gotten better.
Thanks for the input, I will try to update this thread with what happens.
 
I am not sure if the old thought process of r/w on a ssd is accurate anymore. Certainly they have a limited number of writes but the onboard controllers have gotten better.
Thanks for the input, I will try to update this thread with what happens.

I dont think it really is either, however its still rattling around up thier in my Dome... that it would not be a real issue, and if anything not until way further down the road, considering Samsung track record.
as a small IT group you should find that building your own servers will Open up some new business, you will find that clients will be happy to pay 4-5k instead of 8-9 ebn 10k for a comparable Dell,Hp etc etc, and you can make some decent profit, idk how your margins are but we have been lucky to get 8% on workstations, so servers are our saving grace with Hardware anymore.
 
Today I learned Server 2012 failover clustering does not work with SATA drives... sigh back to the drawing board.
 
Microsoft Dynamics #DEAD STARE, good luck feeding that crap

Care to elaborate, I am not familiar with that particular euthanism. I will gladly hear any thoughts on Dynamics.

All ERP's are crap I suppose, it should be a step up from 80's mainframe we are using.
Also I think a lot of it has to do with the developer you go with, dynamics is the underlying base but there is industry specific customizations running on top of it.
 
Today I learned Server 2012 failover clustering does not work with SATA drives... sigh back to the drawing board.

This is partially true, any storage that is native to the system such as direct SATA connection. You could use an external cabinet that supports iSCSI for example with SATA disks and be fine.
 
This is partially true, any storage that is native to the system such as direct SATA connection. You could use an external cabinet that supports iSCSI for example with SATA disks and be fine.

oooooo a glimer of hope!

Thank you kind sir!
 
Don't use consumer grade drives in a server use these: Intel DC S3700

Yeah they're 2-3x more expensive than a consumer SSD but they're also rated at 10 full drive writes per day (vs typically 20GB written/day for most consumer drives) and the controller is far more optimized to minimize "worst case", and have been proven not to suffer performance degradation over time like consumer drives do in server environments (esp in areas where trim might not be available such as use in a NAS or RAID environment)
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Don't use consumer grade drives in a server use these: Intel DC S3700

Yeah they're 2-3x more expensive than a consumer SSD but they're also rated at 10 full drive writes per day (vs typically 20GB written/day for most consumer drives) and the controller is far more optimized to minimize "worst case", and have been proven not to suffer performance degradation over time like consumer drives do in server environments (esp in areas where trim might not be available such as use in a NAS or RAID environment)

Follow me on this, my 'plans' probably have a few holes in them.

I will not need 10 TB of writes per day.
I am planing for smaller daily writes as per the Dell DPACK IO test. SQL 2012 has some better "in memory" transact features. Ergo less unnecessary writes to the SSD. (hole 1?)

On top of which, the money I am saving by using consumer grade allows for multiple SQL clusters in a passive failover scenario.
(more money saved on the SQL license by not doing active).

I am actually planning on 2 year drive refreshes. As in purchasing all new drives, regardless of the wear state. (hole 2?)

I did kind of forget about the availability of trim in a scale out file server role or where the drives are not fully recognized as SSD. (definitely a hole in my plan)
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Hole 1: there exists a wide chasm between 20GB/day and 2TB a day. While you may not need the full 2TB/day do you need more than 20GB?

Hole 2: even if you need less than 50GB/day (20GB/day for 5 years / 2 years), the intel enterprise drives are around 2.5x more up front they'll last at least 5 years because that's what the warranty on them is, and even though the replacement drives will be cheaper in 2 and 4 years, you'll have spent less time replacing drives for no reason and as long as there's no electrical or mechanical failure, there would be a lot of life left in the S3700's after 5 years, and will probably last until they die of other component failure or just get too small and need a size upgrade, even then you could just expand the RAID with equivalent drives at that point

Hole definite: intel specifically designed the controller and these drives to thrive under adverse conditions, and if you think you might be abusing your SSDs even a little bit relative to the consumer load they were designed to bear, these will keep your DB snappy when the consumer drives might start bogging down.
 
Today I learned Server 2012 failover clustering does not work with SATA drives... sigh back to the drawing board.

This statement needs to be clarified and expanded upon. A SATA interface on a disk is not a limiting factor for any cluster platform to successfully fail over.
 
This statement needs to be clarified and expanded upon. A SATA interface on a disk is not a limiting factor for any cluster platform to successfully fail over.

Validate cluster wizard

Server-2012-Failover-Cluster-36.gif
 
Back
Top