Making Use of Terabytes of Unused Storage

kernspaltung writes "I manage a network of roughly a hundred Windows boxes, all of them with hard drives of at least 40GB — many have 80GB drives and larger. Other than what's used by the OS, a few applications, and a smattering of small documents, this space is idle. What would be a productive use for these terabytes of wasted space? Does any software exist that would enable pooling this extra space into one or more large virtual networked drives? Something that could offer the fault-tolerance and ease-of-use of ZFS across a network of PCs would be great for small-to-medium organizations."

Porn

[by Anonymous Coward]

It's the obvious choice.

Re:Typical IT guy

[kernspaltung (975145)]

Way to jump to conclusions about me and how I manage a network. I honestly didn't ask the question as a "control freak", I don't spy on the employees, and I don't play Internet cop. I try to get them the tools they need to do their jobs, help them when things don't work, and otherwise stay out of their way. I also didn't imply the pool would be for me to do with as I please; I can see several ways in which that storage would benefit our business were it not spread out in small chunks. The users have all that space, and they simply DO NOT use it. In our business, they don't have much call for large files like photos, movies, etc. It's mostly spreadsheets and OpenOffice Writer documents. But thanks for being an ass.

vista?

[stillb4llin (1232934)]

install vista on them, that would fill up that space and give you something to manage your time a little better than wondering about what you could manage..

Re:vista? - DFS

[whackco (599646)]

You know, make fun of Microsoft all you want, but they actually have something for this - DFS - Distributed File System. Just create a share with each of these and POOL IT with a DFS system. Then use and manage it to your hearts content with all the midget-donkey-goatse crap you want.

Re:vista? - DFS

[OnlineAlias (828288)]

This is why SAN manufacturers have come up with "thin provisioning". NetApp is quite good it, read more here [netapp.com].

Re:vista? - DFS

[felipekk (1007591)]

Running DFS (to serve files) on Windows XP clients? What are you smoking?

From Microsoft TechNet:

The servers that will participate in DFS Replication must run Windows Server 2003 R2.

It is possible to use DFS Namespaces when domain controllers and namespace servers run a mix of Windows Server 2003 R2, Windows Server 2003 with SP1, Windows Server 2003 without SP1, and Windows 2000 Server, but some functionality is disabled or available inconsistently, depending on the operating systems on the servers.

From: http://technet2.microsoft.com/WindowsServer/en/library/1aa249c0-40f3-4974-b67f-e650b602415e1033.mspx?mfr=true [microsoft.com]

Re:It's been done by Microsoft: DFS NameSpaces

[Spokehedz (599285)]

Even a blind squirrel will find a nut every once in a while.

Re:vista?

[Mantaar (1139339)]

No, Vista is useless. Here's something that makes a lot more sense:

http://www.uniquepeek.com/viewpage.php?page_id=1517 [uniquepeek.com]

:-)

easy!

[by Anonymous Coward]

Does any software exist that would enable pooling this extra space into one or more large virtual networked drives?

Absolutely! Just hook them up directly to the internet before you update the machines, wait a few minutes, and voila! They'll be filled up with extra files in no time! Hey, you didn't say anything about wanting to be in control of what gets put on the machines...

Not without heavy utilization of other resources

[Mostly a lurker (634878)]

If you have a very robust local network with plenty of spare capacity, and can accept a performance hit on the client computers, I am sure some kind of linked filesystem would be possible. In most practical situations, I think this idea would be a non-starter.

Please don't

[mnmn (145599)]

Please do not use the space for anything else. Do not try to actively use the space.

The reason is the obscenely large amount of power required to use the space given a few gigabytes requires the whole machine to be running, and uses it's CPU which can't be less than 21Watts itself.

It's actually cheaper to get a 1TB drive and use it elsewhere than use the power on so many desktops (or worse, servers). Even with the desktops in use by active users.

Re:Not without heavy *use* of other resources

[fretlessjazz (975926)]

Well, you sound like a troll. I seriously doubt anybody misunderstood what he meant because he used the word "utilization". Or, should I say he utilized it? UTILIZE UTILIZE UTILIZE UTILIZE UTILIZE UTILIZE UTILIZE UTILIZE Does it hurt yet?

Re:Not without heavy *use* of other resources

[Dogtanian (588974)]

Read George Orwell's essay on this topic.

Going by his dislike of overused, cliched phrases expressed in that essay, today's "businessspeak" (mindless repetition of words and phrases that have long since been driven into the ground by thoughtless, banal, stupid repetition) would have him spinning in his grave so much that we could use him as a form of renewable energy.

The solution is obvious. We need to think outside the box and raise the bar when it comes to language... someone needs to step up to the plate and bring something new to the table. I'm thinking of someone I have synergy with, not just the type that goes for the low-hanging fruit.

Ooh.... he's spinning nicely. Another couple of Orwells and we'll have enough electricity to power the world :)

Re:Not without heavy *use* of other resources

[dreamchaser (49529)]

I think what you're saying is we need to leverage a new paradigm in order to take things to the next level. Am I right?

Do you really have control of the boxes?

[Marc Rochkind (775756)]

If they're in a computer room, then such a scheme might work. But, if they're on user's desks, you don't really have control. They're subject to filling up, being shut off, being knocked about, crashing, etc. I don't think in this case you would really get the reliability that the diversity and independence would suggest.

--Marc

Download and mirror the Internet...

[SiegeTank (582725)]

...just in case your connection fails.

Space is not that important any longer

[eebra82 (907996)]

It's a very interesting question, but from my point of view, hard drive space is so ridiculously cheap nowadays that it is utterly pointless to look for a useful application that will fill it up.

Let's assume that the average computer has 80 GB of storage. Multiply that by 100 and you get 8 TB of space. That's what you can get into one or two computers nowadays without plunging out too much cash.

What's more interesting is how much processing power you have as well as how fast the internet connection is.

Re:Space is not that important any longer

[jaxom (90814)]

I disagree with this and face this question all the time in work. Disks are cheap, storage systems aren't. If this is for a business that requires reasonable uptime, then the only solution would be to implement a SAN using Fibre Channel or iSCSI and then take out the drives. With the right array, all of a sudden those drives become superfluous (you decide if boot from SAN is right for you), management is easier and you'll be able to get a lot of reuse out of the drives.

Now a lot of people will start to question the cost of doing all of this and it isn't cheap, however you have to analyze the data correctly. We migrated 200 servers from DAS to a SAN and had our money back within 12 months. Add on top of that the implementation of VMs, all of a sudden those 200 went to 20. That's a big difference in cost of ownership.

Re:Space is not that important any longer

[LWATCDR (28044)]

Yep a better question is Why do all these PCs have harddrives?
If they are really only using it for the OS, a few applications, and a few docs why not use diskless workstations?
Less power, heat, and fewer things to break.
In other words don't use all those drives, get ride of all of them.

Sanmelody

[theoverlay (1208084)]

Datacore offers software called Sanmelody to turner servers into a cheap storage network and there are other vendor solutions as well. http://infiniteadmin.com/ [infiniteadmin.com]

AFS

[arabagast (462679)]

OpenAFS [openafs.org] is a distributed file system. It seems to fit your bill. No personal experience, so don't know how well it actually works.

Looking at the problem another way...

[pedantic bore (740196)]

You might want to ask yourself why, after more than a decade of research and countless papers and prototypes that address this problem, your PCs storage are still underutilized...

It's harder than it looks to get something reliable. Your PCs have extra capacity because it's cheap, but mining that capacity is not cheap. As other posters have pointed out, putting together (or just purchasing) a server with a few TB of storage is simpler and cheaper, less prone to getting wiped out by a virus, easier to manage and backup.

Birth of the Matrix?

[TropicalCoder (898500)]

What would be a productive use for these terabytes of wasted space?

Well, I had this idea when I read about some Open Source software that allowed distributed storage (sorry, forgot what that was, but by now I am sure it has already been mentioned in this discussion). The idea was this - suppose we have such software for unlimited distributed storage, so that people can download it and volunteer some unused space on their HD for a storage pool. Then suppose we have some software for distributed computing like we have for the SETI program. Now we have ziggabytes of storage and googleplexflops of processing power, what can we do with that? How about, for one thing, storing the entire internet (using compression, of course) on that endless distributed storage, and then running a decentralized, independent internet via P2P software? The distributed database could be constantly updated from the original sources, and the distributed storage then becomes in effect a giant cache that contains the entire internet. Now we could employ the distributed computing software to datamine that cache and we could have searching independent of Google or Yahoo or M$FT. Beyond that we could develop some AI that uses all that computing power and all that data to do... what? - I'm not sure yet. Just thought I would throw this out there to perhaps maybe get stepped on, or who knows, inspire further thought.

Re:not enough info

[BeanThere (28381)]

100 computers in his mom's basement? That's a big basement.

Re:Send them to our troops in Iraq

[eagl (86459)]

The drive survived because the 9mm is weak. Get a better gun using a better round, like .40 cal or even a good old .45.

I've had a chance to read after-action reports from Iraq and Afghanistan, and the 9mm is pretty much a joke. Most of the forces that really rely on hangun stopping power have obtained emergency authorization to bypass normal procurement processes in order to get better handguns using better ammunition. To my knowledge, a modern .45 is considered one of the best alternatives.