|
cheese-cube posted:Oh and sorry about the I, for one, value this thread specifically for the  that go around. It's nice both to be able to vent to other people who understand what you're dealing with, as well as to learn something about other peoples experience. So thanks, and keep the coming.
|
#
?
May 29, 2012 15:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 15:55 |
|
|
cheese-cube posted:Have you lodged the fault(s) with IBM yet? I'm interested to see how you get along as my support experience with V7000 hardware has been pretty poor. Intraveinous posted:I, for one, value this thread specifically for the
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2012 15:32
|
|
|
Is it just me, or is no one able to fully execute with some kind of crazy fuckup. Is there a rock solid SAN provider out there (regardless of cost) that doesn't run into some kind of issue?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2012 16:35
|
|
|
skipdogg posted:Is it just me, or is no one able to fully execute with some kind of crazy fuckup. Is there a rock solid SAN provider out there (regardless of cost) that doesn't run into some kind of issue?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2012 16:55
|
|
|
Goon Matchmaker posted:I can neither confirm nor deny my involvement. IBM skipdogg posted:Is it just me, or is no one able to fully execute with some kind of crazy fuckup. Is there a rock solid SAN provider out there (regardless of cost) that doesn't run into some kind of issue? HDS high end gear is pretty drat reliable. The customer I work with (and worked for, for 3 years) has a 9990V with a 9985 virtualized behind it and they have had perfect uptime for about 4 years now. Not a single unscheduled outage or disruption of any type. It's very very well engineered gear. Unfortunately for Hitachi their sales team sucks and they really haven't been able to keep up with the expanded feature sets that many customers expect from consolidated storage.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2012 18:28
|
|
|
Vanilla posted:The VNXe is CIFS, NFS and iSCSI. You're right, I'm sorry. We did not spend a lot of time looking at the VNXe and I posted that in a rush, not sure what I was thinking. It does not have data tiering like FAST VP, but the Equallogic boxes do.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2012 19:44
|
|
|
skipdogg posted:Is it just me, or is no one able to fully execute with some kind of crazy fuckup. Is there a rock solid SAN provider out there (regardless of cost) that doesn't run into some kind of issue? No. Even buying the crown jewels of the SAN world (EMC Symmetrix VMAX/DMX & HDS USP/VSP) will not guarantee you a trouble free experience. The above platforms are built to ensure there are little or no issues and the support models for these arrays are usually a cut above the rest. Both are built on mature code and have built up a level of trust in the storage world over many years......but they are still entirely fallible. There are a number of ways to reduce the impacts from issues, such as DR arrays, having strict policies enacted quickly, active/active storage, etc. Tier 1 arrays can handle failures very well - often losing something like an entire front end board can have little or no impact on the array or apps.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2012 12:21
|
|
|
Pantology posted:To be fair, it's an internal cheerleading video made for EMCWorld, not a real marketing campaign. Doesn't make it any less terrible, though. Best comment under this abomination: "white people - the video" 
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2012 02:35
|
|
|
xarph posted:Never forget Mr. T shilling for HDS. As far as rapping goes Hitachi's evergreen "Hard Drive Is The New Bling" is still unbeatable in my eyes: http://www.hgst.com/tech/techlib.nsf/techdocs/23E2C1A0961EB5618625706F0057A63C
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2012 02:47
|
|
|
I'm a bit of a SAN noob but these are most likely easy questions for you guys. 1. I have two physical Qlogic HBA on a IBM Blade. I would like to connect them both to 1 LUN via iSCSI on a Netapp SAN. How would I setup MPIO? Do I just configure both HBA's to point at the LUN and the MPIO will figure itself out? Or is there third party software I would install on the OS? 2. For Netapp, can someone explain initiator groups to me? From my understanding, you need a initiator group mapped to a lun so will be availible as a target. Also it stops other nodes from accessing the lun unless it's iqn? is put inside the initiator group. 3. What are the pros\cons\best practices for Volume size\LUN per Volume\Lun sizes etc..\ 4. Pros\Cons between hardware\software initiators? I assume hardware has better performance overall. 5. I mapped a LUN through a physical HBA initiator but when I boot up into windows and check the network connections, the IP address of the network adapter is 169.x.x.x? is this right? Any references or websites which are helpful in making me understand the concepts and real life usage of SANs would be awesome. I understand SANs are used everywhere, but I'd like to know why X scenario would be better then Y scenario using ____ method. Thanks! lol internet. fucked around with this message at 04:07 on May 31, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2012 04:04
|
|
|
Interesting, looks like Netgear is taking the plunge into Storage Area Networks http://netgear.com/business/products/storage/ReadyDATA-family/RD521210.aspx#one The hardware itself looks like rebranded Supermicro chassis, although I'm curious simply due to the fact how outstanding our lower end Netgear ReadyNAS has been so far.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2012 04:22
|
|
|
Wicaeed posted:Interesting, looks like Netgear is taking the plunge into Storage Area Networks That's a shitton of features out of the box though.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2012 10:20
|
|
|
Wicaeed posted:Interesting, looks like Netgear is taking the plunge into Storage Area Networks Do NOT get me started on Netgear's storage products. One of my bosses mate's works at Netgear doing sales and several months ago he convinced my boss to go Netgear NAS products for the purpose of providing off-site data replication for customers. We purchased a ReadyNAS 4200 and the idea was that we would run the 4200 in our datacentre and deploy the smaller ReadyNAS Pro units at customer's sites which would then replicate back to the 4200. Since deploying them we have had nothing but problems and my colleague has almost been driven to insanity from dealing with Netgear support. Things got so bad that earlier this week they flew one of their level 3 technicians over from Sydney to try and sort out all our problems. evil_bunnY posted:Lord save us! That's what we thought as well until we had a meeting with some QNAP reps today who took us through their product line and honestly it shits all over Netgear's offerings (Not sure about price though as we are still working on getting quotes). Personally I think that when Netgear went to market far too early when they decided to break out from the consumer/prosumer market into the SMB/large business. All of the "new" features in the new ReadyDATA 5200 have already been available in QNAPs products for quite some time. Netgear really needed to let their product mature before making their marketing push. Oh and on the subject of the new ReadyDATA 5200 you cannot use ReadyNAS Replicate to replicate data between the 5200 and any other existing ReadyNAS products. The current line of ReadyNAS products run some flavour of Linux and use ext3 for the filesystem while the 5200's now run Solaris and use ZFS which is why they are not backwards compatible (Or so I've been told). All the same the ReadyDATA 5200 may be able to fill a small niche. I was told that they expect pricing for a fully-populated 5200 enclosure to come in under $10k which is pretty cheap for a NAS which supports iSCSI and has 10GbE.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2012 12:43
|
|
|
Also:quote:7. Does ReadyDATA 5200 support other vender’s HDD? Jeff fukken Bonwick posted:The original promise of RAID (Redundant Arrays of Inexpensive Disks) was that it would provide fast, reliable storage using cheap disks. The key point was cheap; yet somehow we ended up here. Why?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2012 12:52
|
|
|
What is 'ol Jeff up to these days?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2012 16:29
|
|
|
NippleFloss posted:Not sure where the VNX to Equallogic transition is coming from. Going from a unified block/file scale up SAN to an iSCSI only scale out SAN doesn't make much sense to me. The VNX line is a direct response to NetApp and NetApp would be the obvious competitor. The VNXe line was put out to compete with Equallogic. Efb. By days.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2012 21:10
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:What is 'ol Jeff up to these days?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2012 21:15
|
|
|
lol internet. posted:I'm a bit of a SAN noob but these are most likely easy questions for you guys. Needs more info. Is this going to a 10g network? If so use one for iSCSI and the other for redundancy. quote:2. For Netapp, can someone explain initiator groups to me? From my understanding, you need a initiator group mapped to a lun so will be availible as a target. Also it stops other nodes from accessing the lun unless it's iqn? is put inside the initiator group. I can't speak for Netapp, but initiator groups on my nimble are so you aren't broadcasting 300 different initiators to a single box. If I just dumped everything out in the wild without grouping, when I fired up iSCSI initiator I'd see pretty much every chunk of iSCSI storage flopping around. It's messy and harder to manage. So instead I create a group for each server (Or one to hold all of my VMFS partitions) and present them logically to the array. quote:3. What are the pros\cons\best practices for Volume size\LUN per Volume\Lun sizes etc..\ Start small. It's easier to grow if you need it than it is to reclaim if you need it. Don't create huge fuckoff luns. It's tempting but it WILL bite you in the rear end unless you have an unlimited budget. Keep like data together as much as possible. Honestly these questions would be a lot easier to answer if you told us what you were doing. quote:4. Pros\Cons between hardware\software initiators? I assume hardware has better performance overall. The difference is overhead, but in a modern setup, overhead is not a big enough deal to matter. Most array vendors seem to prefer software initiators as their software can mod the initiator timeouts and such on the fly. Do whatever the storage vendor suggests. quote:5. I mapped a LUN through a physical HBA initiator but when I boot up into windows and check the network connections, the IP address of the network adapter is 169.x.x.x? is this right? It's all dependent on how you set it up. I route my poo poo through a 10G segregated vlan on my switches because it gives me better scalability and I can monitor what's going on. If an HBA starts dropping packets I can find out easily. quote:Any references or websites which are helpful in making me understand the concepts and real life usage of SANs would be awesome. I understand SANs are used everywhere, but I'd like to know why X scenario would be better then Y scenario using ____ method. Again it would be easier for you to just tell us what you want out of it.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2012 21:22
|
|
|
lol internet. posted:I'm a bit of a SAN noob but these are most likely easy questions for you guys. I know that Rhyme also responded to this, but I'll give some NetApp specific responses. 1) Download and install the NetApp MPIO DSM. It will handle the path management and make your multiple paths appear as a single logical device. You've got certain options regarding how to balance the traffic across the two links as well. Round-Robin is generally a good recommendation for most configurations. The NetApp DSM is generally more stable with than the MS generic MPIO stack. 2) igroups are used for what's called LUN masking, which is the ability to limit visibility to a LUN to certain servers. Unless you're running a cluster you will only want a lun mapped to a single igroup. So if you have a LUN you want to attach to a server you would create an igroup for that server, add the IQN for that server into the igroup, and then map the lun to the igroup. Pretty simple. 3) This is generally determined by whether you're taking snapshots, and how many. Volumes and LUNs just containers and from a storage performance perspective those containers can be very big or very little. It makes no difference. On the client side, the way I/O queues are handled could mean that it makes sense to break one LUN into multiple smaller ones. But that's very dependent on a lot of factors and not a general recommendation. The big things to keep in mind are that a) disk I/O contention happens at the aggregate level, so if you need to isolate applications from one another you need to put them on separate aggregates. b) If a volume fills up all of the LUNs in that volume go offline, which is bad. Snapshots are a big reason for volumes filling, so ensure that you leave enough overhead in a volume to prevent snapshots from filling it. 4) There's very little reason to use a H/W initiator. The CPU overhead from software is pretty minimal on current very fast multi-threaded systems. 5) I'm not sure exactly what you're asking here, but since this is a NetApp system you should be using Snapdrive for this. Before any storage will be visible to the server you must create an iSCSI session between the initiator on server and the NetApp. You can do this through the windows iSCSI applet, or through Snapdrive. Once you have a session established all of the LUNs you have mapped to the server will be visible. When creating your iSCSI session be sure that you're creating it on the appropriate IP addresses. Your server and your NetApp should have IP addresses on the same subnet so that you aren't routing your iSCSI traffic. Rhymenoserous posted:The VNXe line was put out to compete with Equallogic. It's a multi-protocol array that includes the ability to attach external storage. Equallogic is iSCSI only and expands in a scale out fashion. They're targeted at the same customers and compete in the same price segment, but architecturally they are pretty different. If you're requirements are "IP network storage of some type" then both will meet your requirements, but there are some differences that prevent them from being direct competitors.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2012 23:13
|
|
|
lol internet. posted:I'm a bit of a SAN noob but these are most likely easy questions for you guys. Your questions got covered pretty well, but here's another thing: Try to use NFS for everything you can. Netapp arrays work way better with NFS than with iSCSI or FC.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2012 06:41
|
|
|
Nomex posted:Your questions got covered pretty well, but here's another thing: Try to use NFS for everything you can. Netapp arrays work way better with NFS than with iSCSI or FC. I agree use NFS because it makes VMware datastores easier/more flexible, but you could quantify why NetApp does it way better than the other protocols? I ask because this is not my experience, and not what I've read from TRs comparing the various protocols. So I'm wondering whether I've been isolated in my career and there's some important experience I've missed out on so far...
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2012 14:45
|
|
|
cheese-cube posted:That's what we thought as well until we had a meeting with some QNAP reps today who took us through their product line and honestly it shits all over Netgear's offerings (Not sure about price though as we are still working on getting quotes). I concur with what you have said. We were looking at the 5200s but I convinced QNAP to let me test drive one of their 2U units and I've not bothered to even consider anything else since. Amazingly easy to setup, fantastic interface and the drat thing just WORKS. Also, if you want rough pricing for QNAP, hit up CDW. They have most of their units in stock and their price isn't a long way off what you will pay, especially if you already have your pricing adjusted for you company. Also, Newegg has some QNAP stock.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2012 18:04
|
|
|
Pvt. Public posted:I concur with what you have said. We were looking at the 5200s but I convinced QNAP to let me test drive one of their 2U units and I've not bothered to even consider anything else since. Amazingly easy to setup, fantastic interface and the drat thing just WORKS. Also, if you want rough pricing for QNAP, hit up CDW. They have most of their units in stock and their price isn't a long way off what you will pay, especially if you already have your pricing adjusted for you company. Also, Newegg has some QNAP stock. This is great to hear. Both myself and my colleague (The one who was driven to the brink of insanity from Netgear tech support) are extremely excited about the QNAP offerings. At the moment we are trying to get some proof-of-concept/demo units from them which may be difficult as they have limited market penetration in Western Australia. If you can offer any info or advice re distributors in the WA or AU region feel free to PM or e-mail me at cheeseDOTcubeATgmailDOTcom.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2012 18:47
|
|
|
Nomex posted:Your questions got covered pretty well, but here's another thing: Try to use NFS for everything you can. Netapp arrays work way better with NFS than with iSCSI or FC.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2012 01:59
|
|
|
adorai posted:NetApp themselves see a very minor performance difference between NFS, iSCSI, and FC. NFS is nice because the filer has insight into the filesystem as well as the hypervisor, but the performance difference is absolutely minor. Yep, this is what I was getting at with my previous post - NetApp have released a Technical Report (TR-3916) showing the differences are negligble. As an aside, for anyone here that is a NetApp guy, if you don't know what a TR is or don't read them, you need to start doing so immediately.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2012 04:17
|
|
|
cheese-cube posted:This is great to hear. Both myself and my colleague (The one who was driven to the brink of insanity from Netgear tech support) are extremely excited about the QNAP offerings. At the moment we are trying to get some proof-of-concept/demo units from them which may be difficult as they have limited market penetration in Western Australia. If you can offer any info or advice re distributors in the WA or AU region feel free to PM or e-mail me at cheeseDOTcubeATgmailDOTcom. I will speak with my sales guy at QNAP and ask if he has any good advice for you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2012 15:33
|
|
|
Someone earlier was talking about DRBD active/active, GFS, and NFS and it wasn't clear if NFS was on top of this stack. For the record you can't do this because of file locking issues with NFS on this stack. You'll get kernel panics and eventually find the RedHat docs that say this isn't supported at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2012 17:30
|
|
|
cheese-cube posted:Have you lodged the fault(s) with IBM yet? I'm interested to see how you get along as my support experience with V7000 hardware has been pretty poor. They're a decent company with decent products (and their support is, at absolute worst, still better than EMC). Their midrange products are compelling and have an excellent price point (if IBM likes you and your vertical). They're very responsive when you have issues, if you have pre-existing escalation channels. These channels are impossible to figure out on your own, and you basically need to rely on having a really good partner to advocate on your behalf when the poo poo hits the fan (we do). We have a tendency to break things and discover quirks long before new units ever hit production, so we generally know in advance who the techs are that we trust. IBM is usually pretty good about assigning a case to a particular tech if you ask them specifically. Our organization joined the Early Access Program, so we have a Lab Advocate and a direct line into product engineering. I highly recommend going this route if you can. If you can't, open up a conference call with your vendor, with your storage sales rep, and someone from the support team and figure out the appropriate chain of escalations for when you have critical outages. If you've been told that a future firmware will fix your issue, you can probably use that as leverage to get into the EAP and get assigned a Lab Advocate for your next rollout. That said, V7000 is still an extremely new platform (compared to something like ONTAP anyway) and you should sort of expect to live life on the edge for another year or so. Lastly, I can't stress enough for the thread that with any vendor, when you're having issues with the responsiveness of support, you never try to escalate through support because them being off in their own hosed-up little world is exactly why your issue is already not being dealt with. Always escalate critical support issues through your sales contact. Vulture Culture fucked around with this message at 18:32 on Jun 2, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2012 18:27
|
|
|
We're running a couple of NetApp FAS3170 units with the new fancypants version of OnTap that offers the use of vFilers. I have to ask - am I completely retarded, or are the exports inside of a vFiler a humongous pain to update? For the average vFiler, we'll have an exports list that looks something like this: code:1) Go into the CLI, figure out where the raw exports file for the vFiler lives, and grab the current contents (i.e. rdfile /vol/vfiler_bajilliondollarinfrastructure_1/etc/exports) 2) Dump the contents into some scratch space (i.e. notepad window). Edit it to add our new IP address(s) onto the end of the given volume entry where required. 3) Inject our changed data into the raw exports file - wrfile /vol/vfiler_bajilliondollarinfrastructure_1/etc/exports - paste the modified contents in. Leave a newline at the end and hit ctrl+C to terminate. Shudder at the ominous (but ultimately innocent) i/o error that appears. 4) SCARY PART: Go into the vfiler context. Run exportfs -a. Promptly crap your pants as you realize you made a single typographical error between steps 2 and 3, causing the NetApp unit to reject your modified exports. As an extra gently caress-you, the NetApp will then completely purge all the active exports in memory on that particular vFiler (which up until that point had been running fine with the old exports set still "loaded") 5) Realizing all NFS storage on that vFiler is now broken, frantically go back and dump in a corrected exports file before NFS mounts start timing out and the world ends. This is a terrible and retarded way of doing it because of the huge risk involved, and I want to know if there's something better. We've toyed around with the NetApp Management Console software, as well as the other web-based command applications, but they either suck at updating the exports (and ultimately never do it properly), or just don't properly support exports inside of a vFiler. NetApp support is no help - I yelled at them for a month about it and got a half-assed response that basically said they would look at possibly making this better in the future. I refuse to believe that there isn't a better way of handling things - are there any NetApp export gurus out there who could offer some tips? Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2012 00:45
|
|
|
Get thee to the NetApp PowerShell Toolkit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2012 01:35
|
|
|
Parias posted:We're running a couple of NetApp FAS3170 units with the new fancypants version of OnTap that offers the use of vFilers. I have to ask - am I completely retarded, or are the exports inside of a vFiler a humongous pain to update? You should really be using exportfs -p to add exports entries, rather than the manual method that you suggest as it prevents you from hosing the entire exports file. exportfs -p sec=sys,rw=1.2.3.4,root=1.2.3.4 /vol/exportedvolume That will add the export to the exports file and also the running exports table. You can use exportfs -z to remove entries from the exports file. By default exportfs -z will just comment the entries out, which can get messy, but there is an option you can change to modify that behavior to delete instead.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2012 04:21
|
|
|
complex posted:Get thee to the NetApp PowerShell Toolkit. Neat. I'm always a fan of Powershell-based solutions. Does it support Exports manipulation inside of a vFiler though? The documentation seems a little vague on that front. NippleFloss posted:You should really be using exportfs -p to add exports entries, rather than the manual method that you suggest as it prevents you from hosing the entire exports file. Also neat, and not a bad idea. Let's say I'm just updating an already-existing entry to add additional IP addresses then (instead of adding a whole new entry) - if I just use exportfs -p, copy in the already-existing line I want to modify for the arguments, and then just add the new IPs onto the end of it, will it just gracefully update the existing entry in memory? I think the only other concern I have on this is that we've had occasional issues with the active exports "in memory" and the data in the source /etc/exports file going out of sync; this can cause a real headache during maintenance (i.e. OnTap updates, etc) because it re-reads the source exports file during failover and we'll end up with a great surprise when random export lines go missing - will this update the source exports file as it goes?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2012 16:29
|
|
|
Parias posted:Neat. I'm always a fan of Powershell-based solutions. Does it support Exports manipulation inside of a vFiler though? The documentation seems a little vague on that front. I no longer administer a NetApp, and the old job never ran vFilers, so I can't say. But isn't one of the benefits of vFilers that they behave like a seperate NetApp? I would say Add-NaNfsExport and other commands would work against a vFiler just like a real "full" NetApp.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2012 16:39
|
|
|
Parias posted:Also neat, and not a bad idea. Let's say I'm just updating an already-existing entry to add additional IP addresses then (instead of adding a whole new entry) - if I just use exportfs -p, copy in the already-existing line I want to modify for the arguments, and then just add the new IPs onto the end of it, will it just gracefully update the existing entry in memory? If you update an already existing entry using "exportfs -p" it will comment out the old line, add the new one to the exports file, and update the running exports table in memory to account for the changes. It is the best way to keep the running table in sync with the exports file on disk. If you don't like the mess it creates with all of the commented out entries you can change the option nfs.export.exportfs_comment_on_delete to off and it will remove entries that are being modified or deleted from the exports file. And yes, you should also be able to use the PowerShell toolkit to manage exports on vFilers. The nfs API is one of those that is exposed to vfilers. EDIT: One other useful command to know: exportfs -w will allow you to create an exports file based on the running exports table. So if I wanted to create an exports file that perfectly matched my exports in memory I could run "exportfs -w /etc/exports" and it will overwrite my existing exports file with the new one representing my running exports. Or you could write it to /etc/exports.new and sanity check it before putting it in place. YOLOsubmarine fucked around with this message at 20:25 on Jun 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2012 18:17
|
|
|
NippleFloss posted:EDIT: One other useful command to know: exportfs -w will allow you to create an exports file based on the running exports table. So if I wanted to create an exports file that perfectly matched my exports in memory I could run "exportfs -w /etc/exports" and it will overwrite my existing exports file with the new one representing my running exports. Or you could write it to /etc/exports.new and sanity check it before putting it in place. That in particular is very, very cool. Thanks for the tips and postings, I've gotten some valuable information which should help preserve my sanity in the future.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2012 01:02
|
|
|
A NetApp Administrator shall always check the /etc/exports file and compare it to the in memory exports before an outage or they shall no longer be a NetApp Administrator.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2012 05:58
|
|
|
Trying to decide right now between the VNXe 3300 and a EqualLogic 4100 series setup. 1 Shelf of fast, 1 of slow for each. Assuming pricing is pretty close to each other, any reason I should run away from either solution? The NAS functionality of the VNXe currently has us leaning that way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2012 22:34
|
|
|
skipdogg posted:Trying to decide right now between the VNXe 3300 and a EqualLogic 4100 series setup. 1 Shelf of fast, 1 of slow for each.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2012 23:26
|
|
|
I have a Nimble CS210 demo box, if anyone has any questions about it. From my first impressions, it's very similar to a NetApp. Some notes: Only sold in HA configuration (2 controllers) Only active/passive (the 2nd controller is NOT SERVING DATA) The OS/config is stored on an onboard USB stick (so no disks are consumed by the 2nd controller) iSCSI-only Some pros: There are no "LUNs", just volumes, which makes provisioning space easier Volume Groups are AWESOME, made setting stuff up way easier (manage the group instead of individual volumes) Backups being baked-in to the controller are great Easy to set up Some cons: iSCSI-only with awful VAAI support means it's not well-suited for VMWare You need to replace your SSDs every few years Little-to-no tools for recovering SQL/Exchange data, you're just mounting the snapshots and doing all the work yourself. Needs like 12 goddamned IP addresses (shared mgmt, shared iscsi, controller A, controller B, and then EACH GODDAMN NIC needs its own IP) I should have some more notes/info as I get more time to dive in.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2012 23:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 15:55 |
|
|
skipdogg posted:Trying to decide right now between the VNXe 3300 and a EqualLogic 4100 series setup. 1 Shelf of fast, 1 of slow for each. FYI the VMXe 3150's come out soon and are very promising. I know Nimble is great but all there stuff is basically supermicro, with a custom tailored OS. Netapp is a great person to play off against emc
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 03:08
|
|
