是 NAS / SAN + HTTP 服务器很匹配吗？
NAS / SAN + HTTP 服务器是通过互联网提供大量静态文件的良好解决方案吗？
Is NAS / SAN + HTTP server a good solution for serving large number of static files over the internet?
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（2）
在你的服务器上添加一些内存缓存，你应该会很好。 Apache 有几个模块可以做到这一点。
如果您想改善用户的延迟并降低带宽成本，您还可以考虑静态分布式缓存服务，例如 Akamai 和 PantherExpress。 后者可能是一项不错的投资，具体取决于您的体重成本。
Add some memory caching on your server, and you should be good. Apache has a couple of modules that do that.
You could also take a look at static distributed caching services, if you want to improve latency for your users and reduce your bw costs, like Akamai and PantherExpress. The latter can be a good investment, depending on your bw costs.
这实际上取决于您要解决的总体问题。 SAN 非常复杂，并且是一个即将发生的问题。 解决方案的复杂性增加了大量的故障点、维护难度、每个系统上可能存在的非标准驱动程序、每个组件版本之间的互操作性问题。
大多数 NAS 解决方案都是过度设计的问题，等待发生。 仅当您需要在客户端之间实时共享一组数据时，它们才会增加价值。 想想你的问题是否真的需要这样做。 Netapp 确实是我认为可以接受的可靠的唯一 NAS 供应商。
如果可以避免使用 SAN 或 NAS，那就避免使用。 内置硬盘通常更便宜且速度更快。 当出现问题时，他们也能减少性能混乱。 维护更容易。 可扩展性更容易（即，如果您在每台服务器上复制数据，则随着容量的增加而增加性能）。
想想在服务器中获得大量快速存储是多么容易。 HP DL380 G5 可以在一台 2U 服务器中轻松存储超过 1.5TB 的数据。 预计存储速度将比大多数 SAN 或 NAS 解决方案更快。 您不会有控制器冗余，但如果您有冗余服务器，与拥有一份具有冗余路径的数据副本相比，您可以提高解决方案的整体可靠性。
如果您需要立即跨多个服务器更改数据，我仍然会考虑 NAS 是否是正确的解决方案。 取决于您对即时的定义，以及您是否可以在同步期间将更新文件的请求指向具有当前数据的服务器。
我只能想象，当数据集巨大且没有时间创建软件解决方案时，SAN 才是正确的解决方案。 我的经验是，绝大多数 SAN 的建立更多是基于政治需求而不是技术需求。
我只能想象，当 NAS 服务器是 Netapp、数据集非常大、并且该解决方案需要部署得太快而无法让软件解决方案将数据分布到多个服务器内部存储时，NAS 才是正确的解决方案。 一台好的 NAS 服务器非常昂贵，肯定比开发软件解决方案来避免这种情况更昂贵。 但它的部署速度可能会更快。
如果存在政治考虑，SAN 和 NAS 可以帮助将问题/故障归咎于其他团体或供应商。 当我看到选择 SAN 或 NAS 解决方案时，这通常是最重要的考虑因素。
This really depends on the overall problem you are solving. SANs are incredibly complicated and are just a problem waiting to happen. The complexity of the solution adds huge numbers of failure points, maintenance difficulty, possibly nonstandard drivers on every system, interoperability problems between versions of every component.
Most NAS solutions are overengineered problems waiting to happen. They only add value when you need to share one data set in real-time between clients. Think about whether your problem really calls for this. Netapp is really the only NAS vendor that I consider acceptably reliable.
If you can avoid a SAN or NAS, avoid it. Internal hard drives are usually cheaper and faster. They also have less performance confusion when there is an issue. Maintenance is easier. Scalability is easier (i.e. you add performance as you add capacity, if you are replicating the data across every server).
Think about how easy it is to get a large amount of fast storage in a server. A HP DL380 G5 can comfortably have over 1.5TB in one 2U server. Expect the storage to be faster than most SAN or NAS solutions. You won't have controller redundancy, but if you have redundant servers anyway, you increase the overall reliability of the solution vs having one copy of the data with redundant paths to it.
If you need to instantly change the data across multiple servers, I would still consider whether a NAS is the correct solution. Depending on your definition of instantly, and whether you can point requests for updated files to the servers with the current data during synchronization.
I can only imagine a SAN being the correct solution when the data set is huge and there is no time to create a software solution. My experience is that the vast majority of SANs are set up more based on political requirements than technical ones.
I can only imagine a NAS being the correct solution when the NAS server is a Netapp, the data set is very large, and the solution needs to be deployed too quickly to allow for a software solution to spreading the data across multiple servers internal storage. A good NAS server is very expensive, certainly more expensive than paying for development of a software solution to avoid one. But it can possibly be deployed more quickly.
If there are political considerations, SANs and NASes can help to push blame for problems/failures to other groups or to vendors. This is usually the most important consideration when I see a SAN or NAS solution chosen.