Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

SoHo NAS With Good Network Throughput?

m0e Re:Network won't be your bottleneck. (517 comments)

Welcome to real-time processing IT. Where you either know your shit soup-to-nuts or go home crying to mommy. :D

more than 5 years ago
top

SoHo NAS With Good Network Throughput?

m0e Network won't be your bottleneck. (517 comments)

Disk will always be. Since disk is your slowest spot you will always be disk I/O bound. So in effect there's no real reason to worry about network throughput from the NIC. NICs are efficient enough these days to just about never get bogged down. What you would want to look at for the network side would be your physical topology -- make sure you have a nice switch with nice backplane throughput.

About disks:

Your average fibre channel drive will top out at 300 IO/s because few people sell drives that can write any faster to the spindle (cost prohibitive for several reasons). Cache helps this out greatly. SATA is slightly slower at between 240-270 IO/s depending on manufacturer and type.

Your throughput will depend totally upon what type of IO is hitting your NAS and how you have it all configured (RAID type, cache size, etc). If you have a lot of random IO, your total throughput will be low once you've saturated your cache. Reads will always be worse than writes even though prefetching helps.

If you're working with multi-gigabyte datasets, you'll want to increase the number of spindles (ie number of disks) to as high as you can go within your budget and make sure you have gobs of cache. If you decide to RAID it, which type you use will depend on how much integrity you need (we use a lot of RAID 10 with lots of spindles for many of our databases). That will speed you up significantly more than worrying about the NICs throughput. don't worry about that until you start topping a significant portion of your bandwidth -- for example, say 60MB/sec sustained over the wire.

This doesn't get fun until you start having to architect petabytes worth of disk. ;)

more than 5 years ago
top

Sprint Cuts Cogent Off the Internet

m0e Re:Neutrality (413 comments)

Tier-1/2 transit providers have been depeering and blackholing each other since the the Internet's infancy. Sometimes over as little as a squabble between the two companys' engineers. Usually it gets resolved quickly ($$$). Sometimes it doesn't. Seems like a stupid thing to do IMO since it is doing nothing but hurting their customers.

[SprintCust] Hey, we can't get to (insert CompanyB web application -- important to SprintCust's business)
[SprintCust] *calls up CompanyB* Hey, is your application down? We're trying to do our business with you but we can't and we're losing a lot of money
[SprintCust] ...
[SprintCust] ...it's because of WHAT?
[SprintCust] FUCK SPRINT

Then multiply that by a number whose product will cause the irritation of some upper managers and this will finally end -- they'll at least route traffic to them if they don't re-peer. (in theory -- i never said Sprint was a rational company)

more than 5 years ago

Submissions

m0e hasn't submitted any stories.

Journals

m0e has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>