+----- On Thu, 03 Jun 1999 13:44:32, "Richard L. Rhodes" writes:
| Hi Ya'll,
|
| This is probably one of those questions for which there's no
| true correct answer, but I'm interested in peoples opinion.
|
| 1) In setting up a NetApp, is it better to use one big/wide
| connection (say gigabit ethernet) as opposed to a bunch of
| narrow connections (say, 4 100mbps ethernet in a etherchannel).
| (Note that for this discussion I'm ignoring the redundancy in
| a etherchannel.)
|
| 2) On a Unix system that will be doing heavy NFS work to a NetApp,
| is it better to use separate mounts on separate but smaller ethernet
| connections (100mbps ethernet), or, run all mounts through one wide
| ethernet connection (gigabit ethernet)?
|
| Specifically, I'm going to be setting up an Oracle DB on a NetApp.
| I'm looking at whether I would be better off using multiple 100mbps
| ethernets or one gigabit ethernet connection.
In my experience using a single big whatever is best unless you know
precisely what your are going to be doing with it. A single big
whatever is much more flexible. Having said that though I am not sure
that a single gigabit connection is going to give you more throughput
that an ether-channel, your really comparing 2 sorts of big. The same
thing applies on the Unix side, I would probably be more inclined
towards ether-channel on both. One thing that I have found is that
having large differences in the speed of your server and client nearly
always causes problems.
/Michael