Our humble geoserver instance needs to be able to host GEOTIFF image pyramids ranging in size from a few gigs to a few TBs. A NAS appliance with raid 10 seems smart from a maintenance/expandability perspective but wouldn't a few internal SSDs beat the snot out of it performance wise?
related: Disk access characteristics of accessing vs building an image pyramid.
host: 12 core xeon, 16GB ram, windows server 2008 running hyper-v and an ftp server. It has two gigabit ethernet ports and a few USB 3.0 ports. One ethernet port is reserved for the uplink. The other is not being used.
vm: Ubuntu 14.04 running Geoserver 2.7.2 with 8GB ram and 4 dedicated processors.
uplink: 320/320 Mbps or 40/40 MBps
edit:
We need a NAS regardless for imagery backups. I am leaning toward putting a SSD in the host machine for the VM's VHD, Then I will mount the geoserver data directory on the NAS and perform periodic backups of the VHD to the NAS
أكثر...
related: Disk access characteristics of accessing vs building an image pyramid.
host: 12 core xeon, 16GB ram, windows server 2008 running hyper-v and an ftp server. It has two gigabit ethernet ports and a few USB 3.0 ports. One ethernet port is reserved for the uplink. The other is not being used.
vm: Ubuntu 14.04 running Geoserver 2.7.2 with 8GB ram and 4 dedicated processors.
uplink: 320/320 Mbps or 40/40 MBps
edit:
We need a NAS regardless for imagery backups. I am leaning toward putting a SSD in the host machine for the VM's VHD, Then I will mount the geoserver data directory on the NAS and perform periodic backups of the VHD to the NAS
أكثر...