| 1 |
On Wednesday 26 November 2008 11:16:51 Stroller wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 25 Nov 2008, at 21:35, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 3 |
> > ... |
| 4 |
> > Personally, I'm very interested in seeing where Intel go with their |
| 5 |
> > new SSDs. |
| 6 |
> > The reason is that I'm getting sick and tired of having to explain and |
| 7 |
> > justify why the laws of physics prevent my girlfriend from being |
| 8 |
> > able to |
| 9 |
> > backup her 5T banking warehouse on the schedule the law of the |
| 10 |
> > country would |
| 11 |
> > like her to. There's a solution, but it's hackish and ugly and |
| 12 |
> > involves |
| 13 |
> > extremely careful management of LVM snapshots. This is simply way |
| 14 |
> > too much |
| 15 |
> > admin effort for what should really be a simple incremental backup |
| 16 |
> > process. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Sounds like you want ZFS. |
| 19 |
> On Solaris. |
| 20 |
> On a little dedicated box which exports space via NFS. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
No can do :-) |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
But I didn't give you the full story. Those 5TB are stored in a column-based |
| 25 |
database on a raw device. The current setup is in production, in a commercial |
| 26 |
bank and is already delivering aggregated analytical data to the users. When |
| 27 |
I say "users" you should read "actuaries that determine the bank's business |
| 28 |
direction for the next several years" |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Microsoft will ditch Windows and fully embrace OSS long before that lot will |
| 31 |
entertain the mere idea of a platform change :-) |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
Archives