RE: comparison HP-san vs netapp

[Matthew Zito]

Title: Message

Sorry - vendor-specific terminology floating in.  Vif = Virtual Interface.  There's two modes - failover and link aggregation, and a couple of different ways to configure it.  But, its a free and very stable feature of Data OnTap (the Netapp OS), so there's no reason not to use it if you have multiple ethernet interfaces.    Thanks, Matt -- Matthew Zito GridApp Systems Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell: 646-220-3551 Phone: 212-358-8211 x 359 http://www.gridapp.com -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Binley Lim Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 4:29 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Subject: Re: comparison HP-san vs netapp What is a "VIF on the filer"? ----- Original Message ----- From: Matthew Zito To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 7:59 AM Subject: RE: comparison HP-san vs netapp   Depending on the number of hosts on your theoretical SAN, Netapp will make management much much easier.  And like Dick says, have at least two gigabit cards in your hosts that are dedicated for your NFS throughput and dual attachments in the 825 and set up VIF on the filer.  In the same way you isolate your SAN traffic onto a dedicated link, you need to isolate your NFS traffic.   Thinking long-term, Netapp is at the forefront of iSCSI and DAFS - protocols that may or may not be successful long-term in the market (though I think they will), but in a few years you will have an easier upgrade path to take advantage of these when you decide you're ready to.   Thanks, Matt