Kallin, I don't have experience with SAS storage and don't recall SAS being mentioned on Lucene/Solr lists. But I do recall NFS being mention on several occasions:
http://search-lucene.com/?q=sas+nfs http://search-lucene.com/?q=sas+nfs+san From a few of my quick Google-based quick self-education queries, I'd say SAS is clearly superior to storage of Lucene/Solr indices on NFS, which has/had issues, as you can see from the above threads. Otis ---- Sematext :: http://sematext.com/ :: Solr - Lucene - Nutch Lucene ecosystem search :: http://search-lucene.com/ ----- Original Message ---- > From: "Nagelberg, Kallin" <knagelb...@globeandmail.com> > To: "solr-user@lucene.apache.org" <solr-user@lucene.apache.org> > Sent: Tue, April 27, 2010 4:13:27 PM > Subject: nfs vs sas in production > > Hey, A question was raised during a meeting about our new Solr based > search projects. We're getting 4 cutting edge servers each with something > like > 24 Gigs of ram dedicated to search. However there is some problem with the > amount of SAS based storage each machine can handle, and people wonder if we > might have to use a NFS based drive instead. Does anyone have any experience > using SAS vs. NFS drives for Solr? Any feedback would be > appreciated! Thanks, -Kallin Nagelberg
