Ok, so a little background. the storage situation at my organization is our weakest link in our network. Currently we have a single HP MSA P2000 with 12 spindles (7200 rpm) serving two separate ESXi clusters. We have a 2 node cluster for our operations (Exchange, AD, SharePoint Foundation, and other miscellaneous applications) and a 3 node cluster for development machines. Development is our core business, in simple terms we do SI work for Oracle Retail applications which includes custom development. Some in the organization argue this data may be even more important than the aforementioned operations systems, thankfully IMO my boss (the CEO) disagrees with that opinion. Also, when presenting this same information (rolled up better to speak CEO), my bosses response was whatever I think is the better solution. The company really does stand behind me in what I suggest, I just don't want to add additional risk.
It is not uncommon for us to max out the disk i/o on 12 spindles sharing the load of almost 150 virtual machines and everyone is on board that something needs to be changed.
Here is what the business cares about the solution: Reliable solution that provides necessary resources for the development environments to operate effectively (read: we do not do performance testing in-house as by the very nature, it is much a your mileage may vary depending on your deployment situation).
In addition to the business requirements, I have added my own requirements that my boss agrees with and blesses.
- Operations and Development must be on separate storage devices
- Storage systems must be built of business class hardware (no RED drives -- although I would allow this in a future Veeam backup storage target)
- Must be expandable to accommodate future growth
Requirements for development storage
- 9+ Tib of usable storage
- Support a minimum of 1100 random iops (what our current system is peaking at)
- disks must be in some kind of array (zfs, raid, mdadm, etc)
Proposed solutions:
#1 a.k.a the safe option
HP StoreVirtual 4530 with 12 TB (7.2k) spindles in RAID6 -- this is our vendor recommendation. This is an HP renew quote with 3 years 5x9 support next-day on-site for ~$15,000
Pros
Can purchase support
Single-vendor -- "one throat to choke"
Integrated solution
Cons
Less performance than solution #2 out of the box
More expensive to upgrade later (additional shelves and drives at HP prices)
All used hardware
#2 ZFS Solution ~$10,000
24 spindle 900Gb (7.2k SAS) in 12 mirrored vdevs
Based on Supermicro SC216E16 chassis
X9SRH-7F Motherboard
Intel E5-1620v2 CPU
64 GB of RAM
No L2ARC or ZIL planned
Dual 10gig NICs
Pros
Better performance out of the box (twice the spindle count)
Non-vendor specific parts means upgrades require less investment
Cons
Self-supported
I am the support contract
Multiple vendors and suppliers to acquire parts
Combination of new and used hardware (the chassis) to get this price point
Alright, tear me apart tell me I am wrong or provide any other useful feedback. The biggest concerns I have exist in both platforms (drives fail, controllers fail, data goes bad, etc) and have to be mitigated either way. That is what we have backups for -- in my opinion the HP gets me the following things:
- The "ability" to purchase a support contract
- Next-day on-site of a tech or parts if needed
With the $4000 saved from not buying the HP support contract I can buy a duplicate Supermicro system, and a couple extra hard drives, and have the same level of protection.
Note: this is my first time posting an actual give me feedback topic, I tried to include all information I felt was relevant. If more is needed I can provide.