Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 5 Feb 2014 03:08:34 -0500
From:      Rich <rincebrain@gmail.com>
To:        Daniel Kalchev <daniel@digsys.bg>
Cc:        freebsd-fs <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: practical maximum number of drives
Message-ID:  <CAOeNLuqhT1y7rzA2=80jzXByrYy0cbCTaFv-5=X1KOnkFtRN8Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <52F1DEBC.9020304@digsys.bg>
References:  <52F1BDA4.6090504@physics.umn.edu> <7D20F45E-24BC-4595-833E-4276B4CDC2E3@gmail.com> <52F1DEBC.9020304@digsys.bg>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The SAS2008 has a limit of 112 drives?

http://www.lsi.com/downloads/Public/SAS%20ICs/LSISAS2008/SCG_LSISAS2008_PB_043009.pdf
claims "up to 3000 devices."

SAS2008 is a PCIe gen 2 x8 chip.

I suspect the bottleneck order would go SAS expander then SAS2008 then PCIe.

- Rich

On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 1:48 AM, Daniel Kalchev <daniel@digsys.bg> wrote:
> I also wonder how you managed to go over the LSI2008's limit of 112
> drives...
>
>
> On 05.02.14 07:36, aurfalien wrote:
>>
>> Hi Graham,
>>
>> When you say behaved better with 1 HBA, what were the issues that made you
>> go that route?
>>
>> Also, curious that you have that many drives on 1 PCI card, is it PCI 3
>> etc... and is saturation an issue?
>>
>> - aurf
>>
>> On Feb 4, 2014, at 8:27 PM, Graham Allan <allan@physics.umn.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> This may well be a question with no real answer but since we're speccing
>>> out a new ZFS-based storage system, I've been asked what the maximum number
>>> of drives it can support would be (for a hypothetical expansion option).
>>> While there are some obvious limits such as SAS addressing, I assume there
>>> must be more fundamental ones in the kernel or drivers, and the practical
>>> limits will be very different from the hypothetical ones.
>>>
>>> So far the largest system we've built is using three 45-drive chassis on
>>> one SAS2008 (mps) controller, so 135 drives total. Over many months of
>>> running we had several drives fail and be replaced, and eventually the OS
>>> (9.1) failed to assign new da devices. It was time to patch the system and
>>> reboot anyway, which solved it, but we did wonder if we were running into
>>> some kind of limit around 150 drives - though I don't see why.
>>>
>>> Interestingly we initially built this system with each drive chassis on
>>> its own SAS2008 HBA, but it ultimately behaved better daisy-chained with
>>> only one. I think I saw a hint somewhere this could be to do with interrupt
>>> sharing...
>>>
>>> Thanks for any insights,
>>>
>>> Graham
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list
>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs
>>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list
>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOeNLuqhT1y7rzA2=80jzXByrYy0cbCTaFv-5=X1KOnkFtRN8Q>