[OT] Re: [CentOS] Filers, filesystems, etc.
Bryan J. Smith
thebs413 at earthlink.net
Wed Nov 9 14:56:05 UTC 2005
Robin Mordasiewicz <robin at bullseye.tv> wrote:
> I will attest that NetApp is an excellent choice.
They *KNOW* NFS, that's for sure. ;->
99.9% of other NAS devices don't (despite marketing).
> NetApp is more pricey, but they do have an entry level
> system called the FAS270, which is leaps ahead of an EMC
> Clarion if you can even compare them,
Not to nit-pick, you probably shouldn't (forgive me ;-). The
media often likes to, but it's really not one to make.
In a nutshell, the EMC CLARiiON line spanning NAS-to-SAN
fills a different, more flexible role. Sure, it can do many
things NetApp filers can. But for most Small & Medium
Business (SMB) "filer" needs, NetApp is far better for the
task -- at a much lower price point.
When you deploy an EMC solution, you're typically solving
more needs than just filers. So the more SMB "filer"
capabilities of CLARiiON are basically just so you don't have
to go out and buy a dedicated "filer" solution.
But yes, when you just want "filers," you want NetApp over
EMC. I agree that you shouldn't let anyone tell you
[ DISCLAIMER: I've worked both for and in conjuction with
EMC at clients in the past. ]
> and for the added flexibilty the price is not very much
> more. I think NetApp pretty much stands alone.
No one has come up with anything remotely capable to their
Data OnTap OS with its WAFL filesystem. The overwhelming
majority of NAS devices are typically based on BSD, Linux or
Windows Server for Appliances, using their underlying
services and filesystems.
> I don't think another solution will allow you to do CIFS,
> NFS, iSCSI, and Fibre Channel all from the same platform,
CLARiiON will, but at quite a price-point. But as I
mentioned, if you're going CLARiiON, you're probably doing
more things than just filers.
> but there may be. I have used the RedHat Clustering
> solution and it was a hassle.
Compared to NetApp? No joke! You're not going to find
anything PC/NOS based to be remotely as easy and scalable.
In the best case, you might be looking to high-end Sun
servers -- and then you should probably be considering EMC
solutions if you need that scalability anyway.
> P.s. I have nothing to do with the NetApp company, but I
> just love their product after having used it in almost
> every place I have worked at.
What's not to like (other than the price)?
Just so you know where it starts, if you're looking to go
with NetApp filers for NFS and SMB, it's hard to start below
$15,000, and plan at least $30,000 for an entry-level,
Bryan J. Smith | Sent from Yahoo Mail
mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org | (please excuse any
http://thebs413.blogspot.com/ | missing headers)
More information about the CentOS