Storinator 30/45/60 drive chassis

[Deci]

Storinator™ line of Ultra-Large, Direct-Wired storage pods

Now they have the direct connect version (instead of the old sata expander version) a couple of SAS cards and expanders (instead of their rocket cards which arent super performance orientated) could make for a fast high density box and much cheaper than the other 45-60 disk offerings out there if you can live without the easy access hot swap/indicator leds (guess you just have to label all the drives with their SN on the end).

$2900 USD + shipping (60 drive, redundant PSU, rack rails, fans and backplanes) and BYO mobo/cpu/ram/sas card(s)/expanders for a performance setup

Anyone here used one?

 

[cesmith9999]

I have not used one. we looked at them and some other alternatives last year. we had 2 issues

1) drive count/U/$$$ - The supermicro 36 * 3.5 " drive chassis were still cheaper (under $3k) than the 45 drive units (only ones available at the time). and that included the SAS expander.
2) serviceability. we have a lot of SAS 60 drive JBOD's. And they are a pain to service (top load) so we put in the requirement that the drives be exposed for easy service.

The 45 drive chassis were already very deep (39" IIRC). I would hate to see what the 60 drive chassis is in depth. the 60 drive pod will also be ~ 120+ lbs when loaded.

Chris

 

[cesmith9999]

now with the 30 disk unit. one for home is tantalizing again. and in 45drives.com blog. they are referencing using backplanes... even more tantalizing.

Chris

 

[cesmith9999]

Storage Pod 4.5 – Tweaking a Proven Design

they went back to SATA port multipliers. ick...

I would have gone forward in design. SAS expanders...

Now this is a chassis that is begging for the Xeon-D...

Chris

 

[Patrick]

Storage Pod 4.5 – Tweaking a Proven Design

they went back to SATA port multipliers. ick...

I would have gone forward in design. SAS expanders...

Now this is a chassis that is begging for the Xeon-D...

Chris

I think the big reason is that they went with those Highpoint HBAs and there was limited availability.

 

[Deci]

i can see why they went with those highpoint cards for the sheer density they offer, but the performance they claim to offer is just poor for the number of disks attached.

if you get the direct wire (v4.0 as linked in the first post) you can add sas expanders as they are just sas break out cables, but i have never been very keen on the whole single sata port to 5 drives idea off a not particularly performance oriented sata controller to begin with, for what they do it serves the purpose but it doesnt fit a performance environment.

 

[cesmith9999]

port multipliers aid in lowering the cost. I just found that in using them for windows storage spaces to be totally unreliable. blue screens and poor performance.

BackBlaze storage profile probably does not tax the system too much which would allow them to get away with this configuration..

It would not have taken that much modification to use 2-4 SM backplanes instead. just expensive if you buy them new $400-$500 each.

Chris

 

[PigLover]

Don't forget that to backblaze pennies are more important than performance. They live their life in a highly competitive and low margin end of the cloud marketplace and their customers don't pay any extra for performce

 

[cesmith9999]

Don't forget that to backblaze pennies are more important than performance. They live their life in a highly competitive and low margin end of the cloud marketplace and their customers don't pay any extra for performce

my point exactly

Chris

 

[ATS]

Storage Pod 4.5 – Tweaking a Proven Design

they went back to SATA port multipliers. ick...

I would have gone forward in design. SAS expanders...

Now this is a chassis that is begging for the Xeon-D...

Chris

Purely cost savings issue. It was cheaper to buy the backbplanes and low cost SATA cards than the wiring harness. Plus the 40 port cards couldn't have been cheap. And they are primarily limited by network anyways to 1Gb/s per box. Remember, they have over 1000 of these boxes, so the performance of a given box really isn't an issue.