:* Andrew S. Baker [mailto:asbz...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* 05 September 2010 15:14
*To:* NT System Admin Issues
*Subject:* Re: SAN Storage
Stonefly...
*ASB *(My XeeSM Profile) http://xeesm.com/AndrewBaker
*Exploiting Technology for Business Advantage...*
* *
On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 10:32 AM, Paul
from now on, all we need now is extra hardware to
expand if we needed.
From: Paul Hutchings [mailto:paul.hutchi...@mira.co.uk]
Sent: Sunday, September 05, 2010 11:42 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
I'll have a gander at their website. Anyone familiar with Compellent
Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
I got a Compellent recently and I can say I am very impressed with the
System, their Tiering works as expected, Non Active Data gets moved down
to cheaper storage according to the profiles you setup, against their
advice we cut out some SATA in the order and now
15.57%
These are the snaphost's
System Space
1.31 GB
0.00%
OS Space
Let me know if something doesn't make sense J
Thx!
From: Paul Hutchings [mailto:paul.hutchi...@mira.co.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 1:14 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
I'd
*To:* NT System Admin Issues
*Subject:* RE: SAN Storage
Thanks Mark, have to admit I’d been mostly comparing the 16 disk Equallogic
trays and the 8 or 12 disk Lefthand.
In our case out IOPS profile works out pretty low, it’s the volume of data
that pushes the spindle count up it would appear
stuff that's infrequently accessed to the slower,
cheaper bulk storage.
From: Andrew S. Baker [mailto:asbz...@gmail.com]
Sent: 05 September 2010 15:14
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: SAN Storage
Stonefly...
ASB (My XeeSM Profile) http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker
Exploiting Technology
.
From: Paul Hutchings [mailto:paul.hutchi...@mira.co.uk]
Sent: 31 August 2010 17:56
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
Thanks Mark, have to admit I'd been mostly comparing the 16 disk
Equallogic trays and the 8 or 12 disk Lefthand.
In our case out IOPS profile works out
the tapes.
From: Steve Ens [mailto:stevey...@gmail.com]
Sent: 30 August 2010 20:54
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: SAN Storage
I just implemented the LeftHand starter SAN 7.2TB...two nodes with network
RAID. The performance is amazing. 500MB transfer from SAN to local disk in
two
you a
10-20% discount off list keep looking.
From: Steven M. Caesare [mailto:scaes...@caesare.com]
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 5:36 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
The capacity we need (around 15tb usable) isn't a nice number for
either
[mailto:cato.rob...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 2:49 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: SAN Storage
I will be the NetApp fanboy. I love my filers, why?
Dedupe - I am getting about 33% space saving on my CIFS shares. This number
will increase now that I have
...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 1:22 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: SAN Storage
Mark,
Have you noticed any performance differences moving from the CX4 to the NetApp?
- Sean
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 9:44 AM, Weber, Mark A
mark-a-we...@uiowa.edumailto:mark-a-we...@uiowa.edu wrote
on a PS6500e
with 2TB drives is:
Raid 50 = 67.65
Raid 6 = 67.6
mark
From: Andy Shook [mailto:andy.sh...@peak10.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 7:34 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
The capacity we need (around 15tb usable) isn't a nice number for either EQL or
Lefthand
, August 30, 2010 4:15 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
One of the things that concerns me about Lefthand and EQL is that they are
node based - good for performance scale out but it means that at certain
points you're committed to paying for a new tray complete with spindles
is they are great
people to work with.
From: Weber, Mark A [mailto:mark-a-we...@uiowa.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 10:04 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
I found this link a few weeks ago trying to track down what the usable space
would be on a PS6500e with 2TB
31, 2010 10:04 AM
*To:* NT System Admin Issues
*Subject:* RE: SAN Storage
I found this link a few weeks ago trying to track down what the usable
space would be on a PS6500e with 2TB drives:
http://www.milesconsultingcorp.com/Equallogic-SAN-Price-List.aspx
I can vouch for the PS6500e raid
.
From: Weber, Mark A [mailto:mark-a-we...@uiowa.edu]
Sent: 31 August 2010 16:37
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
My boss did this calculation - it is usually true that at some point
tray based systems can meet or beat the same cost/GB as the EQL - for
the systems we were
Paul,
I've got a considerable amount of Equallogic experience and one of the main
reasons I chose them was that you get SAN-to-SAN replication for free. Along
those same lines, watch the software\licensing costs as you compare solutions.
As you license SAN protocols (NFS\CIFS\iSCSI, etc.)
...@peak10.com]
Sent: 30 August 2010 16:36
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
Paul,
I've got a considerable amount of Equallogic experience and one of the
main reasons I chose them was that you get SAN-to-SAN replication for
free. Along those same lines, watch the software
and had Zero downtime from SAN to SAN.
From: Paul Hutchings [mailto:paul.hutchi...@mira.co.uk]
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 11:40 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
Thanks Andy, one of the things that appeals about Lefthand and EQL is
that all the licenses
a nice SAN but what makes them stand out over XYZ?.
From: Garcia-Moran, Carlos [mailto:cgarciamo...@spragueenergy.com]
Sent: 30 August 2010 16:52
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
Take a looksee @ Compellent, we just replaced and EMC NS-20 with a
Compellent Unit and we
the benefit of not having to pay per plugin the way you do
with EMC, Netapp and others.
John-AldrichTile-Tools
From: Andy Shook [mailto:andy.sh...@peak10.com]
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 11:36 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
Paul,
I've got a considerable amount
there's no need for hot storage, it'll all be warm storage.
John-AldrichTile-Tools
From: Paul Hutchings [mailto:paul.hutchi...@mira.co.uk]
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 11:55 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
I did briefly look at Compellent some time back. At the kind
We are using Dell sourced EMC's for FC storage for our VM's. We are
migrating away from NetApp primarily due to cost.
We are spinning up EqualLogics as iSCSI targets for our file servers and
backup-to-disk options.
Is there something that makes you want to lean towards NFS as a mount
, etc so there's no need for hot storage, it'll all be warm
storage.
From: Paul Hutchings [mailto:paul.hutchi...@mira.co.uk]
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 11:55 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
I did briefly look at Compellent some time back. At the kind of size
provision it and then reclaim it - obviously without the pricing I
don't yet know what sort of premium we're talking.
From: Steven M. Caesare [mailto:scaes...@caesare.com]
Sent: 30 August 2010 17:14
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
We are using Dell sourced EMC's for FC
...@spragueenergy.com]
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 12:16 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
Way cheaper cost than EMC , Netapp and Equalogic comparing apples to apples
Licensing, after a set number of disks all systems are fully licensed with
all features, all's you pay in the future
, August 30, 2010 12:17 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
Can you expand a little on migrating away from NetApp primarily due to
cost?
Regarding the NFS question, only that I've heard a lot of good things about
the flexibility NFS brings you and the fact you can expand
including SQL/Exchange.
From: John Aldrich [mailto:jaldr...@blueridgecarpet.com]
Sent: 30 August 2010 17:29
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
I thought that was one of the benefits of virtually all SANs... the
ability to do thin provisioning. I know that LeftHand and virtually
you
can actually compare apples to apples. It usually takes us several emails/calls
to EMC/Netapp to get them to deliver the itemized costs.
mark
From: Paul Hutchings [mailto:paul.hutchi...@mira.co.uk]
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 11:35 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
to deliver the itemized costs.
mark
*From:* Paul Hutchings [mailto:paul.hutchi...@mira.co.uk]
*Sent:* Monday, August 30, 2010 11:35 AM
*To:* NT System Admin Issues
*Subject:* RE: SAN Storage
Most will do thin, what seems more difficult AFAIK is reclaiming the space
if you only need
We're looking at the same thing. We started out about 12 years ago with
a NetApp. When we outgrew it (at 1TB), we went with HP EVA. Now we're
looking at going back to NetApp. We're running a mixed environment of
Windows and UNIX. HP uses Windows Storage Server on their NAS head and
we have
System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
Can you expand a little on migrating away from NetApp primarily due to
cost?
Regarding the NFS question, only that I've heard a lot of good things
about the flexibility NFS brings you and the fact you can expand and
shrink on the fly so if you
System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
Can you expand a little on migrating away from NetApp primarily due to cost?
Regarding the NFS question, only that I've heard a lot of good things about the
flexibility NFS brings you and the fact you can expand and shrink on the fly so
if you need
I'm looking to add in a LH unit to the two that we already have.
The newer software (8.0) supports a kind of network RAID. My LHs are
pretty small (4tb raw) and replicate to each other, so I only have the
4tb minus the formatting (roughly 3.7tb). The ability to add in a unit
of the same size,
I'm sorry to hear you have a small left-hand.
Heh.
Shook
-Original Message-
From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 3:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: SAN Storage
I'm looking to add in a LH unit to the two that we already have
I just implemented the LeftHand starter SAN 7.2TB...two nodes with network
RAID. The performance is amazing. 500MB transfer from SAN to local disk in
two or three seconds.
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Kurt Buff kurt.b...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm looking to add in a LH unit to the two that we
: RE: SAN Storage
I'm sorry to hear you have a small left-hand.
Heh.
Shook
-Original Message-
From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 3:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: SAN Storage
I'm looking to add in a LH unit to the two that we already
the tapes.
From: Steve Ens [mailto:stevey...@gmail.com]
Sent: 30 August 2010 20:54
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: SAN Storage
I just implemented the LeftHand starter SAN 7.2TB...two nodes with
network RAID. The performance is amazing. 500MB transfer from SAN to
local disk in two
server?
One thing I am keen on is, as much as possible, keeping it simple - the
old if I'm not around scenario.
From: Steven M. Caesare [mailto:scaes...@caesare.com]
Sent: 30 August 2010 20:19
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
Their feature licensing is expensive
August 2010 20:19
*To:* NT System Admin Issues
*Subject:* RE: SAN Storage
Their feature licensing is expensive… FC connectivity for VMWare is cheaper
on Dell/EMC, and for NAS connectivity, front-ending the EqualLogic boxes
offer’s more bang for the buck.
-sc
*From:* Paul Hutchings
Im a fanboy for similar reasons.
Ill also admit we are a NetApp VAR, but I get to eat my own dogfood, so it’s
the shiz.
From: Robert Cato [mailto:cato.rob...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 2:49 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: SAN Storage
I will be the NetApp
).
That's a single node/controller.
-sc
From: Paul Hutchings [mailto:paul.hutchi...@mira.co.uk]
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 5:15 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN Storage
One of the things that concerns me about Lefthand and EQL is that they
are node based - good
*From:* Paul Hutchings [mailto:paul.hutchi...@mira.co.uk]
*Sent:* Monday, August 30, 2010 5:15 PM
*To:* NT System Admin Issues
*Subject:* RE: SAN Storage
One of the things that concerns me about Lefthand and EQL is that they are
“node” based – good for performance scale out
43 matches
Mail list logo
