8TB Dell Powervault MD1000 SAS/SATA on Mac

Discussion in 'Mac OS X Server, Xserve, and Networking' started by 2k05gt, Oct 10, 2008.

  1. 2k05gt macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    #1
    I have a Print Shop, we use several MAC G5's and several Windows XP workstations on a 1000 Base T network, with Active Directory, Web and FTP services running in Windows 2003 Server. I was wusing the powervault for Business use, backing up accounting, taxes, word docs, email ect.. the MACs are only graphic design workstations period.
    I have been backing up the MAC files using Retrospect to the powervault Raid 5, but this is in a propriatary format (Image files like ISO)
    I now have decided to try to use the powervault 8tb unit to use strickly for the MACs to use as online storage and security since Raid 5 is fault tolerant.

    I was thinking about loading Linux on the Dell Server that controlls the powervault MD1000 and format it HFS. or use a Mac Server (Pizza Box) with Server and pick up some SAS/SATA Raid Controllers to plug into the Dell Power Vault.

    What would be the better way, I would rather use the current hardware to save money, but if I have to I will buy a Mac Server or Mac Pro to run the external Raid device

    the PowerVault has 16 500 GB 7.2K SATA Drives. and the rear of the unit has 4 mini SAS connectors.. am I chasing a pipe dream Please Help
     
  2. belvdr macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    #2
    Since OS X can natively use NFS, I would install Linux on the Dell box, and format it with ext3. HFS is for Mac local use, and since you can mount this across the network, it is not needed here. Make sure to install the kernel nfs server, then export the directory for the RAID unit to the Mac stations.

    You can use:
    Code:
    man exportfs
    to get the code to export the filesystems.
     
  3. 2k05gt thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    #3
    I think I want to use one of my MAC G5's (PCI-Express)
    What SAS / Raid Card could I install in the MAC to use the Dell Powervault SAS / SATA Storage ?
     
  4. belvdr macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
  5. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #5
    When you move away from Retrospect you are giving up incremental backups. Think real hard before you do that. Incremental backups have a huge advantage. Apple made Time Machine an incremental system for a good reason -- it's the only way to protect against the most common cause of data loss, operator error. Here is the classic example: You delete half a word document then save it but you don't know you did the delete. It's OK because you have a backup. But now you do you daily backup and overwrite your only good copy of the document. Incrementals save all those old versions. Retrospect and Time machine both would work in the above case.

    One other thing, I hope you are not depending on RAID as your redundant backup. Most people count the RAID box as "one" media device and follow the rule that your data must always be on three different media and in at least two different geographical locations. (Think about theft and fire.)

    Use any kind of incremental backup software you like. If you want an open standard format use "dump" from the command line or crontab.

    If I had to select an operating system for use on a file server my hands down choise would be Solaris. Use ZFS. ZFS is by far the best file system out now and it is mature on Solaris. Also Solaris des CIFS (Windows flavor file sharing) at the kernal level, No need for Samba. Solaris also has a very high erformance network stack It is free and Open Source. What more could you need?
     
  6. belvdr macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    #6
    I have several things I'd like to say here. ;) Their support stinks these days, and their prices are high for their products too. Once they bought StorageTek, the support for our tape silos suffered. That said, ZFS is the next best thing since sliced bread, but I don't think it's relevant here, since, according to Dell, you need PERC 6/E (a hardware array controller), to manage that thing. It's only 16 drives, so you may find the hardware is more of a limitation than the filesystem. I used ReiserFS (v3) on a 42TB SATABeast (42 x 1TB drives), and was able to get 175MB/sec read and 130MB/sec write from it. But, with all things, you never know until you try.

    On topic, before you go over-optimizing the server, make sure your network gear is up to the task as well. No need to have a server that can write 100MB/sec if you are only on 100BaseT.
     
  7. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #7
    How can the price be high? Solaris is free. Zero cost. I didn't suggest getting anything else from Sun. Solaris runs fine on Generic PC hardware
     
  8. belvdr macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    #8
    Oh I was just referring to their hardware and support costs associated with it. It was more of a rant than anything.
     
  9. rswwalker macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2009
    #9
    You don't need a PERC controller to attach to a MD1000 JBOD enclosure.

    You just need a SAS controller that has 4x lane connectors.

    Dell sells a PCI express SAS 5/E controller (LSI 1068 rebranded) that is a straight SAS controller that supports both SAS and SATA drives.

    Though like someone else posted earlier I might just use a Dell box running OpenSolaris and use ZFS snapshots and use NFS/CIFS to share with the Macs and PCs.

    -Ross
     

Share This Page