| 1 |
> |
| 2 |
> Hello, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> I tend to disagree. A correctly designed SAN (using dual Fabric among |
| 5 |
> other things) is a lot more stable and has a lot better performance than |
| 6 |
> any NAS (NFS, CIFS, iSCSI) solution. One other thing that also needs to |
| 7 |
> be correctly configured to have a stable SAN infrastructure is the |
| 8 |
> servers on it (Multipathing, partition alignment, queue depth, ...) |
| 9 |
> according to the storage vendors recommendation. |
| 10 |
> LUN expansion/shrink is storage vendor specific, some can not (netapp |
| 11 |
> apparently) but others can. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Just my 2 cents. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Regards, |
| 16 |
> -- |
| 17 |
> Dan Johansson, <http://www.dmj.nu> |
| 18 |
> *************************************************** |
| 19 |
> This message is printed on 100% recycled electrons! |
| 20 |
> *************************************************** |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Hello Dan, |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Thank you so much. As mentioned earlier I am a new to SAN, and the approach |
| 27 |
we are taking given our limited budget is to purchase an IBM with |
| 28 |
sufficient hdd bays and PCI bus, plugging a PCIe raid card as well as an |
| 29 |
HBA (or two as you mentioned), and installing SCST or ESOS, and going from |
| 30 |
their. Would you be kind enough to give more details about your SAN setup |
| 31 |
in respect to HBA, raid adapters, software etc... I understand that you |
| 32 |
could be using a black box from HP etc.., but just a general idea. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Kind Regards, |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Nick. |
Archives