Home / server / Questions

Questions[storage](server)

Martin Hope
hookenz
Asked: 2013-05-14 20:11:27 +0800 CST
  • 163

SSD drives have been around for several years now. But the issue of reliability still comes up.

I guess this is a follow up from this question posted 4 years ago, and last updated in 2011. It's now 2013, has much changed? I guess I'm looking for some real evidence, more than just a gut feel. Maybe you're using them in your DC. What's been your experience?

Reliability of ssd drives

UPDATE:

It's now 2016. I think the answer is probably yes (a pity they still cost more per GB though).

This report gives some evidence:

Flash Reliability in Production: The Expected and the Unexpected

And some interesting data on (consumer) mechanical drives:

Backblaze: Hard Drive Data and Stats

storage
Martin Hope
MDMarra
Asked: 2011-12-09 11:40:28 +0800 CST
  • 188

This is a Canonical Question about RAID levels.

What are:

  • the RAID levels typically used (including the RAID-Z family)?
  • deployments are they commonly found in?
  • benefits and pitfalls of each?
hard-drive raid zfs storage
Martin Hope
Mark Henderson
Asked: 2011-04-27 14:24:48 +0800 CST
  • 113

This is a Canonical Question about the Cost of Enterprise Storage.
See also the following question:

Regarding general questions like:

  • Why do I have to pay 50 bucks a month per extra gigabyte of storage?
  • Our file server is always running out of space, why doesn't our sysadmin just throw an extra 1TB drive in there?
  • Why is SAN equipment so expensive?

The Answers here will attempt to provide a better understanding of how enterprise-level storage works and what influences the price. If you can expand on the Question or provide insight as to the Answer, please post.

storage
Martin Hope
s.mihai
Asked: 2009-12-18 08:52:17 +0800 CST
  • 82

I have a project that will generate a huge number of images. Around 1,000,000 for start. They are not large images so I will store them all on one machine at start.

How do you recommended on storing these images efficiently? (NTFS file system currently)

I am considering a naming scheme... for start all the images will have an incremental name from 1 up I hope this will help me sort them later if needed, and throw them in different folders.

what would be a better naming scheme:

a/b/c/0 ... z/z/z/999

or

a/b/c/000 ... z/z/z/999

any idea on this ?

storage