|
adorai posted:Just today I was listening to one of my coworkers explain to our CDW rep why we went with Nimble instead of NetApp this time around. His opinion was that not only was it cheaper to get TWO Nimble units instead of just one NetApp, he also feels it is the easiest storage he has ever administered. Further, after the sale he had a great experience with a support rep who noticed an unrelated problem on one of our servers when working on another issue, and he took the time to independently research the issue and emailed him a solution, unsolicited, the next day. Yeah managing a Nimble vs EMC/Netapp is night and day for how few headaches I have.
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2014 16:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 23:21 |
|
|
bull3964 posted:It's funny because I just had the same thing told to me by a re-seller about Nimble. That was true of nimble two years ago when I bought mine very desperate to get a sale, but they are much more secure these days and when I order more units/add on's to the units I have it's a very laid back purchasing experience. Back then I was the guy posting on various forums going "I've never heard of these dudes help!" now I can't walk into a SAN/NAS discussion thread where they aren't talked about as a proven/stable technology. Nimble is great. I'm glad I took one for the team.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2014 22:16
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:I think it is because PowerVaults are OEMed by NetApp (through their LSI storage division purchase). They want to make that money themselves. That's exactly what it is.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2014 22:20
|
|
|
That's not bad at all.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2015 15:59
|
|
|
Docjowles posted:
Competition in the storage arena has been picking up. Also 2012/13 was a bad time to buy bulk storage because of... http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/28/us-thai-floods-drives-idUSTRE79R66220111028
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 21:15
|
|
About 2 years ago I priced out almost exactly the same thing (for the same use case, even) at a prior job, and IIRC it was more like $25k. Would have been nice, but was just a bit too pricey for my boss. So instead they continued limping along on a barely functional HP MSA 2000 
Which thankfully I don't have to loving deal with anymore.
|
Isn't hyper-converged stuff just fancy VSA?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 21:40
|
|
|
Misogynist posted:On the other hand, most of the people in the engineered systems division have seen the writing on the wall and peaced the gently caress out, so good luck actually getting support from whoever is left. The group I used to manage has had a Sev1 ticket open for four months with twice-weekly conference calls going all the way to Janis Landry-Lane and basically every call is IBM going "yeah, we still don't really know what's going on." IBM has been slowly circling the drain for the last 10 years, I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would buy their loving products anymore.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2015 21:56
|
|
|
Richard Noggin posted:What are people using for storage switches in very small deployments (2-3 hosts, 5-15 VMs, iSCSI SAN, vSphere)? We've been using Catalyst 3750-Xs stacked, but only because they've been solid. Looks like the 3750-x's have (Or can have) SFP that support 10g ethernet. You could get 10 gig nics for the servers and bobs your uncle. That's what I did for the longest time before I could justify shelling out for a dedicated 10g switch just for server traffic.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
Meh, I prefer iscsi, at this point with 10gE being commodity priced. The real reason though is that a lot of the mid sized storage arrays only support iscsi. Unless you are doing hft the performance difference just doesn't matter all that much if you design things correctly.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2015 16:19
|
|
|
goobernoodles posted:Engyte is one of my long term potential projects/solutions that I haven't gotten to yet. I'm considering buying a cheap NAS or other form of storage to run the proprietary Egnyte file server VM off of, the idea being to replicate from our existing file server to the Egnyte one. Point would be to not have our file server entrenched in a subscription service and to be able to limit licensing costs to only the people who need to access files remotely. Not sure how I'll replicate between the two without problems though. Robocopy? If you are using Server 2012 Branchcache is a possibility: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd425028.aspx
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2015 15:16
|
|
|
1000101 posted:OP was written a few years ago and I haven't had time to be a good curator. We like Nimble very much (speaking for the company I work for not goons in general) because it's easy to use and it generally performs well at a pretty solid price point. I remember first writing about nimble in this thread like 2-3 years ago and goons going "Not so sure 'bout those dudes" and now I feel all vindicated.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2015 17:52
|
|
|
Raid 10.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
There's nothing difficult about iSCSI or NFS though. On a day to day basis I find both much easier to work with than FC.Kaddish posted:If you're using block level de-dupe and compression at the storage level, it doesn't matter if your vmdk is thin provisioned or thick. A block is a block and it's either being used on the array or it isn't. At least this is true on Pure, which is the only de-dupe/ compression/thin provisioning I use. Nimble specifically tells you to just roll thick provisioned client, it will take care of dedupe. Rhymenoserous fucked around with this message at 20:22 on Aug 18, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
NippleFloss posted:They do inline zero elimination which is a flavor of deduplication and probably what they're suggesting when they say to (eager-zero) thick provision. ^ What he said.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
Wicaeed posted:On my VMware & Nimble setup, our Used vs Free does not match between what Nimble is reporting for used vs what VMware sees. When we format a VM as thick, VMware reports that disk space as immediately being used on the datastore, but if I go into management, I can see that it really is thin provisioned on the storage backend. They expressly told me not to do thin provisioning to avoid confusing scenarios like this. Also bear in mind what you are seeing on the array is post dedupe/compression/magic space maker.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
NippleFloss posted:Cmon man, creating a datastore in VSC and then mirroring it with system manager is not a twenty minute job. If it was EMC it would be a 20 minute job.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
bigmandan posted:It's been awhile since I looked at pricing from Nimble, but I think their entry solutions are near that price point. A quote I have from about a year ago was ~20k CDN for a step above entry. Nimble entry level has about 3-4 times more storage than he needs. At 1.5TB I wouldn't buy anything fancy.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
Just send someone off to the EMC certification class. If you have an isilon it's worth doing.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2015 14:40
|
|
|
Minus Pants posted:Yeah 10GBASE-T is around 1-2 usec slower than DAC or fiber depending on the PHY. And DAC cables are cheap as gently caress. Honestly 10g fiber is pretty loving close to commodity pricing these days. I don't even see the point of 10GBASE-T anymore.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2015 17:21
|
|
|
1000101 posted:This is pretty much what we've done for these large migrations. You probably don't have 100TB of change every day so pre-stage as much as you can then just do a final cutover. https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/2009.04.utilityspotlight.aspx Spawns multiple robocopy threads/does everything robocopy does, with a gui. You can even control how many copy threads it fires up at a time. It's a lifesaver for migrations and it's also free.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2015 17:23
|
|
|
Fruit Smoothies posted:when storage is cheap to buy. Oh it is now? That's good to know, I sure am glad it went from being the most expensive thing to do right to one of the least with no major paradigm shifts. Uh my vendor just got back to me, poo poo's still expensive. You lied to me fruit smoothies. You lied to me.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 15:05
|
|
|
Docjowles posted:I've been asked to help troubleshoot some iSCSI performance issues between a Windows Server host and a NetApp FAS8020. Any suggestions for a good, free storage benchmarking tool that runs on Windows? IOmeter looks decent but it's also old as gently caress (user guide refers to NT 4.0 Just this host having the problem?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 21:48
|
|
). I don't typically support Windows so I'm out of my element here.
|
cheese-cube posted:1Gb would be fine for a three-host setup. Yeah, wouldn't bother with 10g here.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
Thanks Ants posted:Goddam I am so out of touch on storage. I think I'll try and push this off to a VAR to solve and see what I can learn from the process. You want a nimble or a netapp or something of that nature that does flash caching. The what you want isn't hard at all. The real question is "What are you willing to pay".
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
Frank Viola posted:I recently got a NetApp DS14 Mk4 Disc Array, and got another one from a shop oddly enough but not the filer head unfortunately. I connected them through an FC card. I wanted to low level format them but Windows didn't offer that kind of accessibility to my knowledge. Enter CentOS7, both of my servers were running CentOS7 so I tried to do the llf using lscsci and sginfo. No luck. I had read about FreeNAS and decided to implement it on two 3tb drive on an old poweredge that was going unused, so I installed to a SanDisc removable and tried it out. Heres, where the solution came from. Hnnnnnnng.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2016 23:49
|
|
|
the spyder posted:Our leadership is going to have a heart attack when they see the cost. Meh. gently caress 'em. If anyone bitches about how much my infrastructure costs in SAN, network and VM Servers I'll gladly get quotes for bare metal and attached storage, then when they see that poo poo costs almost twice as much I'll spring the power bill and air conditioning costs on them.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
Mr-Spain posted:Has anyone bought anything through http://www.enterasource.com/ ? Provided you can still get a support agreement from the primary vendor (Netapp/EMC/Whoever) I don't see the problem.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
Saukkis posted:This is an important point. About a year ago we were in the process of purchasing new FC switches to our HP blade systems. Then one guy realized that the only thing that matters is that the blade chassis has a support contract and HP will swap any parts no questions asked. So instead of buying new switches for 4k a piece we could just eBay used switches for 1/10th the price. I mean I'd still try to use the used equipment but still. If I have an ironclad support agreement from the primary vendor I'm happy. That's where they make all the money anyways.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 17:59
|
|
|
big money big clit posted:Nah, they aren't car dealers, they make money on product. I mean, EMC does but that's because they charge an arm and a leg.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 22:11
|
|
|
maxallen posted:Curious if anyone has any thoughts why this happened: https://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US&cmd=displayKC&externalId=2006849 Looks like a microsoft/iscsi error that was kicked off by a snapshot
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
devmd01 posted:I will never run a SAN in production without a maintenance contract, period. If the company is willing to accept that risk, then it's time to find a new company. Yeah no poo poo. Servers these days are just the delivery boys and processing oomph for what the san delivers (If you are doing virtualization like a smart person). You could take a hammer to every server in my rack and I wouldn't flinch. I can recover. My SAN? Makes me pucker.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2017 21:43
|
|
|
lol internet. posted:
This is literally a question to ask your storage provider because otherwise the answer is "It depends"
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2019 05:08
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 23:21 |
|
|
I’ll second pure, heard nothing but good things.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2023 04:16
|
|