Back to Community Threads
2
Storage Tier per domain for bigger quotas
Idea shared by Sérgio Rocha - Yesterday at 9:15 AM
Proposed
Hi Everyone,


In my opinion, it's time for SM to consider things from a System Administrator's perspective.

One of the biggest challenges today (aside from JSON corruption) is effective storage management. For optimal performance/value, SM should ideally operate on NVMe storage. However, the high cost of NVMe makes it impractical to store the massive volumes of data required today entirely on this medium.

I believe it wouldn’t be too complex for SM to implement a system with two storage tiers per domain. This would allow older GRP data to be moved from NVMe storage to a more cost-effective alternative, balancing performance and cost efficiently.

Thanks

SR

4 Replies

Reply to Thread
0
We run it on all-flash arrays for that exact reason. Searches for emails would be painfully slow if you use multi-tier storage.
0
The search its based on the Index not in the email grp. 99% of the files touch have less than a mouth.
0
Kyle Kerst Replied
Today at 9:04 AM
Employee Post
That is a cool idea. I've typically run SmarterMail servers on the Windows side using a Storage Spaces backed array so that this happens automatically (that was their storage tiering system in previous builds of Windows) but there isn't a lot of control or visibility into what goes where. It would be neat to do something like that right inside SmarterMail. In the past I've seen people maintain two copies of a domain to accomplish this, with one of them running on SSD/flash and the other on platters:


With the users keeping their 20 year archives of email on the archive domain and anything recent on the domain itself. That might be a solution you could look at in the meantime.
Kyle Kerst IT Coordinator SmarterTools Inc. www.smartertools.com
0
Hi,

We conducted extensive testing with Storage Spaces Tier, but unfortunately, we couldn't achieve the performance required for SM. The results were unsatisfactory, and the system performed quite poorly.

I believe implementing two storage paths per domain should be a relatively "straightforward" solution, and it could have a significant positive impact on our service. It would also greatly increase the amount of storage we can offer to our clients.

Even Microsoft has introduced an archive option within the same mail tree, and they’ve now moved to a separate email tree to support more cost-effective storage solutions. We should take a look to this kind of Sysadmin/infrastructure issues.

Regards,
SR
Back to Community Threads

Reply to Thread

Related Knowledge Base Articles

Resolving JSON IssuesSmarterMail > Troubleshooting
Recommended SPAM SettingsSmarterMail > Antispam and Antivirus
Copy Smartermail Directories on Linux using RsyncSmarterMail > Server Configuration and Management
Message Archiving in SmarterMailSmarterMail > Installation and Configuration
SmarterMail Server Performance TuningSmarterMail > Server Configuration and Management