Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 12:50:22 +0000 (UTC) From: Paul Pathiakis <pathiaki2@yahoo.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, Julien Cigar <julien@perdition.city> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Supermicro HBA Message-ID: <1443717602.966565.1547729422870@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20190117103043.GA44618@mordor.lan> References: <20190117103043.GA44618@mordor.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I've used the LSI 3008.=C2=A0 I haven't had any issues with it.=C2=A0 It i= s supported by that driver.=C2=A0 (I haven't built a server with one lately= ) Yes, avoid all the hardware RAID cards they are unnecessary and a JBOD cont= roller with ZFS is a good choice.=C2=A0 Make sure it supports the SAS3 spec= of 12 Gb/s.=C2=A0 That's where the speed is.=C2=A0 I found the following a= s an FYI. Supermicro LSI SAS3008 HBA Review | StorageReview.com - Storage Reviews |=20 |=20 |=20 | | | | | |=20 | |=20 Supermicro LSI SAS3008 HBA Review | StorageReview.com - Storage Reviews The Supermicro LSI SAS3008 HBAs (which share the same controller as the LSI= 9300-8i HBAs) are engineered to deli... | | | I looked at it as more of a specs education.=C2=A0 It looks solid.=C2=A0 I'= ve used Supermicro without issue in the past.=C2=A0 (I just decommissioned = my home server which was Supermicro and has that very card in it.) There is a lot to consider when using ZFS beyond just the hardware.=C2=A0 D= on't get me wrong.... I want to have ZFS' baby.=C2=A0 :D=C2=A0 Just be sure= of all the nuances of HDD, SSD, Hybrids, how much memory you have to dedic= ate to ZFS and CPU cores you have.=C2=A0 You have to take into consideratio= n all the ZFS features you're planning to make use of now and in the future= . Also, are you ever planning on expanding the storage to have an additional = JBOD shelf?=C2=A0 If so, you may want a card with some external connectors.= =C2=A0=C2=A0 Some of the people at=C2=A0http://www.ixsystems.com=C2=A0have done some ser= ious research on application specific throughput of ZFS and I believe they = also spec out SuperMicro servers too.=C2=A0 It comes down to IOPS, raw thro= ughput, etc.=C2=A0 (I'm actually talking to them right now about some very = large backup servers that can handle 0.75 PB.... The consideration I have i= s space and using RAIDZ2 and multiple streams from 10Gb interfaces and seri= ous compression and deduplication.=C2=A0 SO,=C2=A0 IOPS not so much, but he= avy raw I/O and RAID checksum computation and dedup. There's also things like dedicated SSDs as ZIL and cache to be thought abou= t. So:=C2=A0 go up the theoretical OSI layer model and optimize each layer rig= ht through the application layer. :D=C2=A0 (I actually find it fun) I hope this all helps. P On Thursday, January 17, 2019, 4:33:38 AM CST, Julien Cigar <julien@per= dition.city> wrote: =20 =20 Hello, We are planning to replace some (web) applications servers (currently running HPE) with Supermicro and the vendor offers the following=20 choices for the Hardware Raid Controller/HBA 4P part: 1) Supermicro AOC-S3008L-L8E, LSI 3008 8 x SATA/SAS III JBOD controller, up to 122 hard drives via expander backplane, PCI-E, ideal for Nexenta/ZFS + =E2=82=AC 205,6 2) LSI 9300-4I, SATA/SAS III JBOD controller, tot 256 harde schijven via expander backplanes, PCI-E, ideal for Nexenta/ZFS + =E2=82=AC 214,5 3) LSI MegaRAID 9341-4i bulk, 4 x SATA/SAS 12Gbs internal entry level hardware RAID, no cache/BBU possible, PCI-e + =E2=82=AC 177,97 4) LSI MegaRAID 9361-4i 1GB cache, 4 x SATA/SAS 12Gbs internal hardware RAID, max. 240 hdd using expander backplanes + =E2=82=AC 401,7 5) LSI 9300-4i4e, SATA/SAS III JBOD controller, 4 x internal, 4 x external, up to 256 hard drives via expander backplane, Nexenta Certified, ideal for ZFS, PCI-E + =E2=82=AC 273,95 6) LSI MegaRAID 9380-4i4e bulk, 8 x SATA/SAS 12Gbs, 4 x external and 4 x internal hardware RAID, 1024MB cache, up to 128 hard drives via expander backplane, support for SSD CacheCade 2.0 write and read caching, CacheVault support (advised), ideal for high en + =E2=82=AC 676 As the plan is to use ZFS, I was planning to choose the=20 "Supermicro AOC-S3008L-L8E, LSI 3008" (it looks like it is supported by mpr) and I was wondering if anyone has any feedback on it ? Would another option be a better choice ? Thank you! Julien --=20 Julien Cigar Belgian Biodiversity Platform (http://www.biodiversity.be) PGP fingerprint: EEF9 F697 4B68 D275 7B11=C2=A0 6A25 B2BB 3710 A204 23C0 No trees were killed in the creation of this message. However, many electrons were terribly inconvenienced. =20 From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Thu Jan 17 13:41:12 2019 Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 839201496054 for <freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 13:41:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tomek.cedro@gmail.com) Received: from mail-vk1-f177.google.com (mail-vk1-f177.google.com [209.85.221.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E2818E6CD for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 13:41:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tomek.cedro@gmail.com) Received: by mail-vk1-f177.google.com with SMTP id s184so2265629vkd.6 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 05:41:11 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=u4pVfiMgLcPtdL+BL/lT0IQ/5GStICl2uA9AQHazz8A=; b=WA8N5Ufi5klu378SXMzqfhmXWi+kbaNzMmR7+hhW8kexj3aNsNRBN99CzpOJQcmjIO RH9ZQqlkFq5YRKWu/TGHIRUJ5LBSb0OgSADgZXy98xQvRDvD+QVBZ4kTIHd9wWeedXBf xd6ehlfZ9DtK7RzjqOP1ZOykceipi0/BXX5deRMZTcYYlY7WvKIBiF23e+mzxj6N0t7M kypvFCFTwkHVNJPKwfzyiqDKHG2DULuncNyqiqIHUyT5dvMIz4/BD4N7A9g6Xr0KihHD /xK8Miwm0vD2ycdhkaMBajU0miY90kLiF5RmimLNJO7iXpepYYgOkCFd3Ziu2TxUYZB8 az6g== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukcYXCoEndT2VafuwUiFHnFVal2MM82pHbpJ0Of6pgnO0XHHPdgV LD/uEX2N+cNgXW57GaCxBXUVEdpx9TJ5yt8+jhzUqHJYWCo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN7Bkvh0djOcKRkTNiw0b77r4aSC0iprdUg3Aw6szK6wh7qJQ4EKA8jmUKOgxXYkTiXN/ou0wTNJvinRVptg4IU= X-Received: by 2002:a1f:a8c5:: with SMTP id r188mr5815551vke.44.1547728553932; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 04:35:53 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <dd871ed1-e45b-3ea1-4794-1b4d02b633bb@bluerosetech.com> In-Reply-To: <dd871ed1-e45b-3ea1-4794-1b4d02b633bb@bluerosetech.com> From: CeDeROM <cederom@tlen.pl> Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 13:35:35 +0100 Message-ID: <CAFYkXj=TUGLKz4fA_J7xHyYh8Q+am6BX4M0JSGGQcBJMK0wiWQ@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: UEFI loader picking wrong native resolution, documented fixes don't work To: Mel Pilgrim <list_freebsd@bluerosetech.com> Cc: "freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 5E2818E6CD X-Spamd-Bar: --- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of tomekcedro@gmail.com designates 209.85.221.177 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=tomekcedro@gmail.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.97 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; TO_DN_EQ_ADDR_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:209.85.128.0/17]; IP_SCORE(-1.13)[ipnet: 209.85.128.0/17(-3.76), asn: 15169(-1.81), country: US(-0.08)]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[tlen.pl]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[cached: alt3.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[177.221.85.209.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.0]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.83)[-0.830,0]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[cederom@tlen.pl,tomekcedro@gmail.com]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:209.85.128.0/17, country:US]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[cederom@tlen.pl,tomekcedro@gmail.com]; TAGGED_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-questions>, <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/>; List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 13:41:12 -0000 I have noticed similar problems with my AMDGPU on AMD RADEON. Setting hw.syscons.disable=1 in /boot/loader.conf and then loading the graphics module from rc.conf helped.. https://github.com/FreeBSDDesktop/DEPRECATED-freebsd-base-graphics/issues/170 -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1443717602.966565.1547729422870>