Does anybody have any idea of Parascale Cloud Storage software? Is it worth trying?

it's what softlayer is using - and it works well for a lot of purposes. We've found it to be very client-side focused and eventually it did not do what we wanted from a cloud-storage solution. It is a strange beast somewhere in the middle of S3 and Dropbox...

:)
D

it's what softlayer is using - and it works well for a lot of purposes.


I actually don't believe they're using it - I think they're using Mezeo. I could be wrong though.


We've found it to be very client-side focused and eventually it did not do what we wanted from a cloud-storage solution. It is a strange beast somewhere in the middle of S3 and Dropbox...


This would make sense if you're thinking about Mezeo - which is basically all front-end, and expects scalable storage on the back-end (e.g. doesn't actually provide the global name space, redundancy, scalability or any of the "expensive" storage functions.) Mezeo does seem to offer a many nice front-end access methods - but it won't solve your back-end storage problems.

To the OP, Parascale, on the other hand, can and will solve "back-end" storage issues (and allows you to build your own storage cloud, somewhat similar to S3 - you just need to bring the hardware). Unlike Mezeo or Dropbox, doesn't provide any GUIs for interacting with the files (though it does have a GUI to manage the storage cluster(s)).

We've been using Parascale for almost 6 months and have been very pleased. It offers horizontally scalable storage and I/O, without hardware-vendor lock-in (read: cheaper disks, cheaper storage), as well as solving the reliability issues with silos of storage (single servers holding segments of your content). There's lots more to it as well - but

It supports access via NFS, FTP, and WebDAV straight into the cloud which is nice - and a lot of additional features.

Whether it's worth trying all depends on what you're doing and what you expect Parascale to do for you. If you have a need for high volume, scalable storage (e.g. more than a few TB), then absolutely, Parascale is worth a shot.

If you want to know more about how we're using it, just drop me an email and I'm happy to chat about it.

-Sam

Sam, you are totally right, and I am wrong. I somehow read "Mezeo" where it said "Parascale" - 100% my bad.

:)
D

Any idea on the cost of parascale?

I thought Softlayer is using EqualLogic?

It has been a few months since we last looked at Parascale, and correct me if I am wrong, but I believe their documentation said it wasn't really designed for hosting MySQL data (and the like) with lots of active reads and writes? It is more designed for scalable backup and archive storage?

Anyone using Parascale as a backend storage solution for something like a busy Xen or VMWare setup? Again, from reading their documentation a while ago I got the impression that's not really what it is designed for? Unless I have the wrong end of the stick.

- Chris

I thought Softlayer is using EqualLogic?I believe that's correct: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuXOdeOpCl4 :)

- Chris

It has been a few months since we last looked at Parascale, and correct me if I am wrong, but I believe their documentation said it wasn't really designed for hosting MySQL data (and the like) with lots of active reads and writes? It is more designed for scalable backup and archive storage?

Anyone using Parascale as a backend storage solution for something like a busy Xen or VMWare setup? Again, from reading their documentation a while ago I got the impression that's not really what it is designed for? Unless I have the wrong end of the stick.

- Chris

They have new updates and version coming out soon which will address the active read/write aspect as well as some great new features as well.

I believe that's correct: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuXOdeOpCl4 :)

- Chris

I thought they dumped it and went with isilon iq ?

Any idea on the cost of parascale?

I looked at it and its really meant for simple cost effective pooled storage utilizing simple network raid. It allows one to deploy old servers into a larger storage cluster without using raid cards in them. It writes the data to a disk on 2 different servers in a simple mirroring setup. This way you can outfit old servers with larger cheap disks for file storage. It would require a front end however to present storage in a gui format unless you just want to serve it up as nfs mounts.

I dont really see it for active file and or sql service - just backup and or online storage that does not require a lot of access.

My other question is what is their future as a company - are they profitable and stable? I hate when companies get bought out - its always a big guess as to what is going to happen to the product when that occurs.

You quoted my question about coat... then did not address it, weird.