On Dec 23, 2011, at 2:08 PM, Scott Lewis wrote:

> There's plenty of video and photo professionals. Small shops don't need Xsan 
> and big shops can use macs. There's no reason you can't have terabytes of 
> enterprise storage and have macs. Your San just isn't going to be Apple. And 
> probably not your file server-- if you have one, since EMC, NetApp, etc have 
> been doing so well merging SAN and NAS. 
> 
> I trust Apple to continue to serve the desktop. I trust them to continue to 
> maintain the server version of their software in a way that has some neat 
> features for real small offices that can live with a Mini or MacPro as a 
> rudimentary server. 
> 
> In the mean time, my Macs can and do connect to Enterprise resources. 
> 
> I would like to see better iSCSI support. 


OK first you critique that Apple is out of the enterprise market, and is happy 
without meeting enterprise needs. So I point out that this has consequences for 
people who are not enterprise, and thus do not really have need for a SAN in 
the context given. But you say, of course you can get around the example 
storage problem by getting a SAN and connecting a Mac to it.

Naturally such a Mac user would need a SAN to get logical volume management, 
because Mac OS doesn't have logical volume management, or a particularly 
resilient file system.

It's not necessary to solve this problem with a SAN on linux, because there is 
very good lvm (online storage resizing, data relocation, and rw snapshots) and 
more resilient file systems available. 


Chris Murphy
_______________________________________________
MacOSX-admin mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/macosx-admin

Reply via email to