Server 2016 Storage Spaces build

[Jacob]

Hello All,

I'm looking at building a new server. Specs:

- Supermicro X10SDV-4C-7TP4F (Xeon D 1518, dual 10GBe, 16 SATA off the LSI chip in IT mode)
- 32GB RAM
- 128GB NVMe SSD for OS
- 128GB SATA SSD for Write-Back Cache
- 10 x 6TB WD Red for general pool

Following PigLover's previous posts, it looks like adding an SSD for the write-back cache is very beneficial. Could I create the following and get decent performance?

Get-StoragePool -FriendlyName TieredPool | Get-PhysicalDisk | ?{MediaType -eq SSD} | Set-PhysicalDisk –Usage Journal
New-StorageTier -StoragePoolFriendlyName TieredPool -FriendlyName SSD_Tier -MediaType SSD
New-StorageTier -StoragePoolFriendlyName TieredPool -FriendlyName HDD_Tier -MediaType HDD
New-VirtualDisk -StoragePoolFriendlyName TieredPool -FriendlyName HDD_Parity -UseMaximumSize -ResiliencySettingName Parity -ProvisioningType Fixed -PhysicalDiskRedundancy 2 -WriteCacheSize 100GB -NumberOfColumns 10

10 columns, over 10 hard drives, along with a 100GB write-back cache on the non-NVMe SSD. Would I also get maximum space efficiency? (ie 43.7TB usable)

edit: I would be using an appropriate SSD for the WBC as directed in Don’t do it: consumer-grade solid-state drives (SSD) in Storage Spaces Direct

 

[DieHarke]

For a parity pool with a PhysicalDiskRedundancy of 2 you would need 3 SSDs for the journal to ensure integrity.

 

[i386]

Could I create the following and get decent performance?

This is very hard to answer. When I experimented with storage spaces only mirror spaces were close to the numbers I expected. Parity spaces (+ ssds as write back cache or journaling disks) were really slow with writes, oftern slower than a single drive!

 

[cesmith9999]

One of the things that people forget is that dual redundancy parity eats a 3rd disk as a global parity disk. you will only have 7 disks worth of space. so you may want to go to a mirror and up your disk count. and get MUCH better overall performance.

What is your usage case? home media server? production for work?

Chris

 

[Jacob]

For a parity pool with a PhysicalDiskRedundancy of 2 you would need 3 SSDs for the journal to ensure integrity.

really? hmm, that complicates things. kind of makes it overkill.

One of the things that people forget is that dual redundancy parity eats a 3rd disk as a global parity disk. you will only have 7 disks worth of space. so you may want to go to a mirror and up your disk count. and get MUCH better overall performance.

What is your usage case? home media server? production for work?

Chris

this is for home use. at the moment i am running a 6 x 6TB raidz2 freenas server booted off USB. it performs fairly well but i am a sysadmin that mostly deals with windows, so windows server would've been easier. if it eats a 3rd disk and requires 3 ssd's for journal integrity it isn't really feasible however...

 

[capn_pineapple]

I've found storage spaces to work as a RAID-0 with two disks, it was just too painful to work with when I had a 4 disk RAID-5 I don't have the cash to go get a bunch of SSD's either. Just stick with the freenas for at home storage, it's what I've done.

 

[Jacob]

A bit of a bummer that configuring this server with Storage Spaces will require many more resources. Instead I've decided to go Linux with ZFSonLinux.

Thanks for your help everybody.

 

[natelabo]

At those disk counts it's so much easier to just grab a battery backed RAID controller... Skip the board upgrades. Skip the software problems, Linux and Windows. (Coming from someone that currently has a 150tb storage spaces pool on 2016)

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

[Jacob]

but then you miss out on the goodness that is a next-gen CoW file system..

 

[cesmith9999]

you can still use ReFS on a hardware RAID controller...

Chris

 

[i386]

It was probably a sarcastic post

 

[Jacob]

sorry, shouldve explained more. i was thinking more in line with zfs. if you pass through a raid array off a card then it hasnt got full visibility and you could get bitrot or bad data. thought the same happened with storage spaces and refs.

 

[cesmith9999]

Similar yes,

Storage spaces does not support passing through disks from RAID cards. you need a HBA instead. then you can have multiple copies of the sectors and ReFS will handle Bit-Rot and bad data issues.

Chris