135 Terabytes for $12,000

Re:135 Terabytes for $12,000 by mrb on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @04:24PM (#3100150)

"The backblaze 2.0 pod has exceeded expectations when it comes to data movement and throughput. We get near wire-speed performance across a single Gigabit Ethernet link." - http://bioteam.net/2011/08/backblaze-performance/

Oh my. These guys' expectations were very, very wrong. Many single-drive configurations can sustain 120MB/s+ at the beginning of the platter. A single drive! It should be no surprise that a 45-drive beast can saturate a GbE link!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:135 Terabytes for $12,000 by icefox on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @04:38PM (#3100196)

It is too bad they didn't bond the two ethernet links. Reading through I didn't see a mention of what the other ethernet link was used for. That should have given them a jump in speed.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:135 Terabytes for $12,000 by mmetzger on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @05:06PM (#3100302)

We're considering building one of these but I used to work for a clustered storage vendor. The import thing to notice here is this is single client performance - aggregate performance is often considerably better. ie, you might be able to push 1GB/s with 10 clients, but only 100MB/s with one...

[ Parent | on HN ]