On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 18:10, Sean Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
> Well this is one of those scenarios where I think the customer needs
> to take responsibility. A good practice to get into is the creation of 
> technical
> requirement matrices and business requirement matrices. It helps you put
> on paper what capabilities you need in a solution and gives the vendor a
> uniform method of informing you of the strengths and weaknesses of their
> platform. We typically tier our requirements into 3 categories that allows us 
> to
> weigh the importance of features. For example, a tier 1 requirement might be
> that the solution support fiber channel or iscsi where a tier 2 or 3 
> requirement
> might be support for sub-lun tiering or a 64bit OS to leverage larger cache.

This is EMC for crying out loud - arguably the leader in the field,
and it's a software issue. We're not talking about going with lesser
hardware, which can steeply influence the costs. As well, I was given
to understand that this is a relatively new line for them. They have
the software in hand, and my 4 year old Lefthands don't have this
limitation. I do place this 99% on them (split in some fashion between
EMC and the reseller). I'll hand the 1% to my manager, who had used
them before, doesn't like the Lefthands, and trusted the reseller rep
he's worked with at his prior company. I was given no say in the
matter - I suggested another LH unit.

> It may be too little too late but I'd be happy to share the template we used 
> for our last storage purchase.

That might actually be a nice thing - we might not technically outgrow
the unit, as it can stack a huge number of disks, but I don't see us
doing a whole lot more with it, given that limitation, and the other
that raised my dander.

> - Sean
>
> On Feb 7, 2012, at 4:29 PM, Kurt Buff <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> If true, it would have been nice of them to disclose that before
>> purchase, methinks...
>>
>> Kurt
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 17:04, Sean Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> I believe the next versions of VNX (5700, 7500, etc) support SCSI 3
>>> protocol which would not have that limitation. I believe this was a
>>> limitation that was purposely introduced into the VNXe because EMC is
>>> marketing it as an entry level "all-in-one" storage solution. They
>>> need reasons for customers to scale up to the more expensive
>>> platforms. I believe even the older CX, CX3 and CX4 models supported
>>> SCSI 3.
>>>
>>> - Sean
>>>
>>> On 2/7/12, Mathew Shember <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> I have not used an  EMC in a while but that does sound familiar.
>>>>
>>>> I did find one of their sheets that does say the size is limited to that.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.emc.com/collateral/hardware/specification-sheet/h8515-vnxe-ss.pdf
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Mathew
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Kurt Buff [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 4:22 PM
>>>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>>>> Subject: EMC limitations?
>>>>
>>>> I've got a new-ish (January) EMC VNXe 3100, and have run into a troubling
>>>> limitation - in use as an iSCSI device, it doesn't support LUNs larger than
>>>> 1.99tb. According to a post by EMC staff on their community forum, it's doe
>>>> to the implementation of the SCSI II protocol.
>>>>
>>>> I don't know if this limitations affects its use as a NAS, but that's
>>>> disturbing. My Lefthand units support larger LUNs with no problem.
>>>> And, otherwise, it's performed just fine - no problems at all.
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone out there now if other EMC products have this limitation?
>>>>
>>>> Kurt
>>>>
>>>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
>>>> <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> To manage subscriptions click here:
>>>> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
>>>> or send an email to [email protected]
>>>> with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
>>>>
>>>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>>>> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> To manage subscriptions click here:
>>>> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
>>>> or send an email to [email protected]
>>>> with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
>>>
>>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>>> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>>>
>>> ---
>>> To manage subscriptions click here: 
>>> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
>>> or send an email to [email protected]
>>> with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>>
>> ---
>> To manage subscriptions click here: 
>> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
>> or send an email to [email protected]
>> with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
>>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>
> ---
> To manage subscriptions click here: 
> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
> or send an email to [email protected]
> with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to [email protected]
with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin

Reply via email to