Storage Design Question

[snapwall]

Hi Folks,

Just have quick and general question on designing a scalable and redundant storage solution.

I currently have 4200 with 3x80GB and 1x100GB (drive came when I purchased).

What's the best way to seamlessly migrate to 1TB in the future? Shall I use RAID5 config or RAID1? I'll probably have to use the existing drive for now but know it will be filled within 6-8months...

I am curious on the the best practices to migrate data when upgrading to larger drives (4x250DB)

Appreciate any guidance from seasoned users of Snap servers....

Thanks in advance...
Snapwall

[blue68f100]

Not familar with the 4200. SO I don't know it the OS is stored in flashram.
A simple test would be to set the unit up as JBOD.
Remove all drives and install a 250 in drive 1.
If the OS is stored in flashram it will auto format and install the OS. Then add the other drives.
if not
the OS is stored on the HD, and it uses a std boot loader.

set up raid 1 with drives 1 & 2, after setup complete, fail drive 2, install new, should do the mirror, then fail drive 1, install new, should mirror.
Once the OS is on the main drives just add drives 3 & 4. let it do its thing.

I see from another thread you are using Guardian OS

Raid 5 drives are suppose to be with in 3% capacity of each other. Not a good choice for major upgrades.

[snapwall]

Hi blue68f100,

I'll give your advise a shot. Currrently sourcing 2x320G drives. I am hoping the 4200 doesn't have the size limitation issue like in the 1000/2000 snap servers.

I have feeling the OS is in the HD but will confirm this later.

The main difference I see with GuardianOS 3.1 vs 2.5 is that it supports iSCSI natively. If I choose this then I have to make sure ALL my server/client which access the SNAP server, to be installed with iSCSI initiatining drivers. Windows have this now so I might give it a go while there isn't too much data to work on.
If I choose iSCSI then I am stuck with new filestructre that caters for iSCSI read/write so I have to make the decision carefully and be stuck with it.

It wil be interesting to compare the read/write performance of iSCSI vs default way.


Cheers
snapwall

[blue68f100]

The 4200 shouldn't have the hd restrictions. It was Snap's first attempt at making a field servicable unit. It is also suppose to be faster than the 4000, 4100.
The 3.1 supports MS Active Directory.