ATTENTION: You are viewing a page formatted for mobile devices; to view the full web page, click HERE.

Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Storage Spaces talk

(1/2) > >>

superboyac:
I have a lot of threads about storage and servers here.  As a windows guy, the thing that I've been most fascinated with in recent years is Storage Spaces.   The idea of tossing a hodge podge of drives into a box and creating pools is very awesome to me.  Storage Spaces, as a built in option now in the windows OSs, is something I've been keeping my eye on.  Not much is out there as far as good info regarding it.  Right now, I found a great article for it, so here it is:
http://betanews.com/2014/01/15/windows-storage-spaces-and-refs-is-it-time-to-ditch-raid-for-good/
Disks are bundled into Pools, which are then divided into Spaces. Individual Spaces can then be doled out for complex storage scenarios. It's a pretty straightforward approach in the land of Storage Spaces, and actually works as advertised, I've found. (Image Source: TechNet)

You can't use a Storage Space as a boot volume... yet, of course. I am hoping that day will come, but for now, it's a mechanism for data storage sets only.

But just like RAID, you have a few options for how you can format your Storage Spaces to work. The three options you have include:

Mirror Space: This is the equivalent of a RAID-1, and my favorite Spaces flavor. Exact copies of data is mirrored across two or more drives, giving you the same redundancy that RAID-1 has offered for so long.  Needs at least 2 disks.
Parity Space: This is the equivalent of a RAID-5 array, using parity space to prevent disaster and recover data in the case of failed drives. I personally don't like this Space type as it has given me very poor write speeds in my testing (shown below). Needs at least 3 disks.
Simple Space: Just like a RAID-0, where you are striping data across multiple drives for raw speed but zero data redundancy. I would never use this production systems. This is good for temporary scratch spaces like video editing scenarios. One disk is all you need for this, but using two or more is really where this would shine.
As anyone who reads my work here knows, I'm not interested in marketing success stories. If I'm going to use Storage Spaces for my own company needs, and more importantly, for my clients, I need proof that this tech works.
--- End quote ---

40hz:
Good article. Thx for sharing! :) :Thmbsup:

I pretty much agree with his opinions on Storage Spaces even if I don't quite share all his concerns about some other things. Especially ZFS.

superboyac:
Good article. Thx for sharing! :) :Thmbsup:

I pretty much agree with his opinions on Storage Spaces even if I don't quite share all his concerns about some other things. Especially ZFS.
-40hz (January 22, 2015, 02:39 PM)
--- End quote ---
Seems like his main complaint is the high RAM requirement of ZFS.  I don't know if it's true, but I have heard that from others.  And also, I feel like it's a "who cares?" issue...RAM is cheap.  And people that need stuff like ZFS, I can't see skimping on RAM a big deal.

40hz:
^It has a higher suggested RAM requirement than some things. But, as you said, RAM is cheap. And when it comes to servers, it's generally a good idea to max out your RAM if at all possible - regardless of what file system you're running. These days I prefer most servers to have a minimum of 16Gb of RAM as their base configuration, and then go up from there based on what it's going to be used for.

Deozaan:
FYI that article was written a year ago. I wonder how things have changed since then.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version