Advatronix Cirrus 1200: a Storage Server Under Your Desk
by Johan De Gelas on June 6, 2014 5:00 AM ESTLow Latency Database Servers
The main usage case for the Cirrus 1200 is serving up documents and files, basically a "NAS on steriods". Ganesh specializes in this field, so we'll leave that evaluation to him. There is little doubt in our mind that the combination of quad "big core" Xeon (compared to a much weaker ARM or Atom cores), the relatively high performance RAID-controller, and the large amount of memory should make the Cirrus 1200 a very potent file server, especially compared to the usual NAS solutions that rely on much slower ARM SoCs, Atoms, or Celerons. Most of them also have just 1-4GB of RAM. But as a file server, the Cirrus 1200 is likely overkill.
As we explained in the introduction, we believe that one of the use cases for the Cirrus 1200 is as a high performance database server, potentially combined with a file server. The idea is that you are in full control of your data (i.e. it's not in the cloud), and you can offer low latency (network) access without hosting costs. Most databases are storage limited, so the availablility of 10 (12 in total) hard drives and 6 SSDs sounds very good in that respect. The other technical specifications (Xeon E3, 32GB max) are not ideal for a database server, but they typically aren't as critical. Thus it seemed that it would be very interesting to see what this platform was capable of as a database server, and what would be the best way to configure it.
We used HammerDB to set up a "tpcc-like" database, but we tested the transactions rate with our vApus stress test, as it is more accurate and closer to the real world than the classic "HammerDB" test. It also allows us to integrate extensive monitoring while testing, which can improve our understanding of what is going on. Also, throughput (transactions per second) should not be reported without taking response time into account. We tested with 128 to 1024 connections and report the throughput numbers that—at most—require a response time of 100 ms. We chose this number as a typical database application will do quite a few requests to the database. A 100 ms transaction response time should deliver acceptable application response times (< 1 second).
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
39 Comments
View All Comments
Kevin G - Friday, June 6, 2014 - link
It really comes down to scale. A single system, regardless if it is a 4U server or a gaming rig can be run in a home environment and not have to worry too much about cooling. Sure, putting them in a closet with the door closet will cause them to bake but that'd be true of any high power piece of electronics.For a single server, a CRAC is overkill. When dealing with a room with hundreds of racks, each full of servers, a CRAC is necessary to deal with the heat output. CRAC's are also designed with datacenter RAS methodology. They're highly modular to ease service, typically fit into standard rack row and have monitoring capabilities. Multiple CRAC's can also load balance the cooling needs of a room or act has a 'hot spare' in case another unit fails. These are features you don't find in home air conditioning units.
There is also another thing to factor in comparing a gaming rig with server: size. Common servers are either 1U or 2U in height which means they'll use small high RPM fans internally. This means they're loud and there are a lot of them. Cooling for rack servers is done in one direction: front to back. A gaming rig tends to have plenty of room. Larger, lower RPM fans *can* move more air than several smaller 80 mm fans. In addition, the typical gamer case has more area to draw into it as well as for exhaust. In otherwords, a gaming case is less restrict in terms of airflow for cooling.
sciencegey - Saturday, June 7, 2014 - link
It isn't to do with power draw, it's the fact that your PC isn't running 24/7 with loads of HDDs (which create a lot of heat) and the fact that they will be running at around about 60% load constantly. Also, CRAC is just a fancy way of saying air conditioning.Ratman6161 - Friday, June 6, 2014 - link
Ummmmm. If your business relies on this data then it shouldn't be "under your desk".And don't forget your UPS and your offsite backups either. Another issue I see is that a company of a size that might be looking at something like this probably doesn't have any IT support in house to manage those backups and disaster recovery procedures. Unfortunately that's just the sort of situation where I find businesses doing this sort of thing. An amateur sets something up "under his desk" but when it fails they are screwed. Or when that person leaves the company they are screwed.
So there are probably certain niches where this sort of system could be useful but if a company doesn't either have IT staff or at least a support contract to manage things, it's very likely they would be better off in the cloud - if only for disaster recovery purposes.
Gunbuster - Friday, June 6, 2014 - link
The Dell T620 has a chassis option for 32 2.5" Hard Drivesvalinor89 - Friday, June 6, 2014 - link
"Moreover, while renting a few Terrabytes in the cloud has become relatively affordable..."Terrabytes is meant as a joke or a typo? It sounds cool anyway.
rpg1966 - Friday, June 6, 2014 - link
Terrabytes!https://d2kxqxnk1i5o9a.cloudfront.net/uploads/pict...
thunderbird32 - Friday, June 6, 2014 - link
Fujitsu is a weird company. I've never been able to find a reseller that carries their x86 servers or workstations. One wonders how much business they do in that category in the US.JohanAnandtech - Tuesday, June 10, 2014 - link
Thanks for sharing. Each time I went to Cebit, the people at Fujitsu had little interest talking to me, as I was international press. It is like the x86 line is their just to complete their product portfolio.Drizzt321 - Friday, June 6, 2014 - link
I would have liked to have seen an option to ditch the RAID cards and move to simple HBA cards to allow OS management of the arrays. Would also probably decrease the cost by a good bit.sciencegey - Saturday, June 7, 2014 - link
This thing seems kinda pointless because if you are a small business, you can get a cheap server rack and then get a storage server and even have places to put your network switch and VoIP box. This means you won't have to take up precious office space (you can mount server racks on walls) with this giant blue box. If you are really too cheap for a server rack-mount system, then you would probably just build your own file server, which is pretty easy (if you love Linux, make you own distro, use current distros like FreeNAS or shell out to get Windows Server. And if you are using Macs, then you just use a Time Machine/hackintosh as a Time Machine).