[OT] Storage Systems & SAN

Yahoo Archive
1
We just bought a NetApp FAS270 filled with 14 300GB drives. It is setup
for iSCSI and FC. We use RAID 6 which NetApp really talks up (about 3TB
of usable space). The thing will call home whenever there is a predicted
failure and you will have a hard drive in your hands without even
calling it in! The NAS functionality is a must in my opinion for file
shares as well. This thing is super fast and all of our SQL databases
are on it now. What a difference! The primary use for this SAN is also
VMware with their ability to dynamically move virtual machines between
servers with a SAN on the fly! We looked at EMC and Hitachi. EMC was way
too expensive and Hitachi offered a NAS only through NetApp! NetApp was
much easier to configure than the other two as well. We originally only
budgeted $15K for the SAN but after further research, our solution cost
about $40K but it was worth everything penny for peace of mind.



Joe Luster

Network Administrator

Cold Jet, LLC

513-831-3211 ext. 308

513-831-1209 FAX



<http://www.coldjet.com>



________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Todd Caughey
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 5:02 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] [OT] Storage Systems & SAN



Because we will not be upgrading to 8.0+ this year, and not buying a
server for it, I have the opportunity to upgrade our storage
architecture. Basically to implement an iSCSI SAN. I am looking to see
if anyone has any opinions about a couple vendors.

I have a quote for an Equallogic 100E SAN with 3.5TB raw (perhaps 1.7TB
usable) for $35,000.

I also have a quote for a StoreVault (by NetApp) S500 SAN with 6TB raw
and 3TB usable for $15,000.

In all respects that I can see they are equally functional except that
the StoreVault may be just slightly slower. Speed is not so much a
factor because the primary uses will be user file storage, shared files
folders (CAD, pictures, etc...) and Exchange 2003 stores. No databases
or transaction stuff. Aside from possible issues of reliability or
redundancy I can not justify the huge cost difference. I hate to assume
higher price means more reliable. A third alternative offered by the
StoreVault salesperson was a Hitachi Data Systems SAN for around $30K
that is faster and more solid yet that Equallogic's system and also more
expandable.

Anyone have experience with either system or their maker? StoreVault is
a relatively new division of NetApp targeted at the SMB market so it may
not have a lot of "field experience" but definitely has some features
and a price I like.

BTW...I am assuming from the start that the SAN will not be the location
of any future Vantage DB. I'm not even sure if putting the DB on a SAN
would be acceptable or instead just add one more performance question.
Just curious if this is really the case.

Thanks,
Todd Caughey
Harvey Vogel Mfg. Co.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2
Because we will not be upgrading to 8.0+ this year, and not buying a server for it, I have the opportunity to upgrade our storage architecture. Basically to implement an iSCSI SAN. I am looking to see if anyone has any opinions about a couple vendors.

I have a quote for an Equallogic 100E SAN with 3.5TB raw (perhaps 1.7TB usable) for $35,000.

I also have a quote for a StoreVault (by NetApp) S500 SAN with 6TB raw and 3TB usable for $15,000.

In all respects that I can see they are equally functional except that the StoreVault may be just slightly slower. Speed is not so much a factor because the primary uses will be user file storage, shared files folders (CAD, pictures, etc...) and Exchange 2003 stores. No databases or transaction stuff. Aside from possible issues of reliability or redundancy I can not justify the huge cost difference. I hate to assume higher price means more reliable. A third alternative offered by the StoreVault salesperson was a Hitachi Data Systems SAN for around $30K that is faster and more solid yet that Equallogic's system and also more expandable.

Anyone have experience with either system or their maker? StoreVault is a relatively new division of NetApp targeted at the SMB market so it may not have a lot of "field experience" but definitely has some features and a price I like.

BTW...I am assuming from the start that the SAN will not be the location of any future Vantage DB. I'm not even sure if putting the DB on a SAN would be acceptable or instead just add one more performance question. Just curious if this is really the case.

Thanks,
Todd Caughey
Harvey Vogel Mfg. Co.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
3
We ran a 20GB SQL Database off a Fiber Channel SCSI SAN and it worked great.
Online expansion was great as we could add drives and add them to the RAID
and the ability to add hot spares was good too. Most of these features
have moved into internal RAID controllers now.



We have a small iSCSI array for we use as a "virtual tape" backup system.
We decided to use the Microsoft iSCSI adapter driver instead of buying a
dedicated iSCSI HBA (Host Bus Adaptor) as the server had an extra NIC
build-in. We got it working, but if you're going to use it in a real
production environment I'd say get a real HBA.



Thanks,

Randy Stulce





_____

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Todd Caughey
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 3:02 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] [OT] Storage Systems & SAN



Because we will not be upgrading to 8.0+ this year, and not buying a server
for it, I have the opportunity to upgrade our storage architecture.
Basically to implement an iSCSI SAN. I am looking to see if anyone has any
opinions about a couple vendors.

I have a quote for an Equallogic 100E SAN with 3.5TB raw (perhaps 1.7TB
usable) for $35,000.

I also have a quote for a StoreVault (by NetApp) S500 SAN with 6TB raw and
3TB usable for $15,000.

In all respects that I can see they are equally functional except that the
StoreVault may be just slightly slower. Speed is not so much a factor
because the primary uses will be user file storage, shared files folders
(CAD, pictures, etc...) and Exchange 2003 stores. No databases or
transaction stuff. Aside from possible issues of reliability or redundancy I
can not justify the huge cost difference. I hate to assume higher price
means more reliable. A third alternative offered by the StoreVault
salesperson was a Hitachi Data Systems SAN for around $30K that is faster
and more solid yet that Equallogic's system and also more expandable.

Anyone have experience with either system or their maker? StoreVault is a
relatively new division of NetApp targeted at the SMB market so it may not
have a lot of "field experience" but definitely has some features and a
price I like.

BTW...I am assuming from the start that the SAN will not be the location of
any future Vantage DB. I'm not even sure if putting the DB on a SAN would be
acceptable or instead just add one more performance question. Just curious
if this is really the case.

Thanks,
Todd Caughey
Harvey Vogel Mfg. Co.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
4
Todd,

I would suggest putting the dbase on the SAN. Your performance
should increase if it a good SAN. I had a SQL 120Gb dbase on an EMC
SAN and it was great. Plus you could make a copy of the database in
5 minutes and use it for testing.

To answer your question. If you have it in the budget, go with the
proven technology. Also look at the features. What type of
redundancy (internally to the SAN) does it offer? How many host
adapters can it hold? What is the cost of adding more hosts? Can
you add drives to a server on the fly?, is there an "off-line"
storage area to make copies of data?, is it easily expandable? Maybe
you dont need to add all of the drives now and save $$.

That is my 2 cents. Enjoy the new toy
Jeff

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Todd Caughey" <caugheyt@...> wrote:
>
> Because we will not be upgrading to 8.0+ this year, and not buying
a server for it, I have the opportunity to upgrade our storage
architecture. Basically to implement an iSCSI SAN. I am looking to
see if anyone has any opinions about a couple vendors.
>
> I have a quote for an Equallogic 100E SAN with 3.5TB raw (perhaps
1.7TB usable) for $35,000.
>
> I also have a quote for a StoreVault (by NetApp) S500 SAN with 6TB
raw and 3TB usable for $15,000.
>
> In all respects that I can see they are equally functional except
that the StoreVault may be just slightly slower. Speed is not so
much a factor because the primary uses will be user file storage,
shared files folders (CAD, pictures, etc...) and Exchange 2003
stores. No databases or transaction stuff. Aside from possible
issues of reliability or redundancy I can not justify the huge cost
difference. I hate to assume higher price means more reliable. A
third alternative offered by the StoreVault salesperson was a Hitachi
Data Systems SAN for around $30K that is faster and more solid yet
that Equallogic's system and also more expandable.
>
> Anyone have experience with either system or their maker?
StoreVault is a relatively new division of NetApp targeted at the SMB
market so it may not have a lot of "field experience" but definitely
has some features and a price I like.
>
> BTW...I am assuming from the start that the SAN will not be the
location of any future Vantage DB. I'm not even sure if putting the
DB on a SAN would be acceptable or instead just add one more
performance question. Just curious if this is really the case.
>
> Thanks,
> Todd Caughey
> Harvey Vogel Mfg. Co.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>