Chris,
I'm the person that started the F85 vs. IP4700 thread. Here is one data point. When we benchmarked the F85 it was able to do a single threaded read at 90-95 Mbits/sec and writes at 85-90 Mbits/sec. This was on a 100BaseT full-duplex connection to a linux box. When we tried the same benchmark with the IP4700 it showed 40-50 Mbits/sec read and 20-25 Mbits/sec write. This clinched the deal for the F85's for us. EMC compares the IP4700 to the F8xx line. If the system cannot even keep up with an F85, I think that EMC needs to take a look at what is going on. Also, you should check with EMC regarding their snapshot implementation. Netapp's snapshots don't have to copy old data when a data block is updated. A new block is allocated and then written. I've heard, but haven't verified that the IP4700's filesystem acts more like a copy on write system. First the old data block has to be copied to a new location then the modified data is written. If this is actually the case then the performance of the filesystem will be compromised. I know that there are EMC folks on this list. Maybe one of them can respond.
barry
Chris_Van_Genderen@NexFlash.com wrote:
Bruce,
One of the items that I did not mention was that we are a start up company that is using the back-end infrastructure of our parent company. I have been given the task of not only buying a NAS device for company wide storage, but also to build the entire network infrastructure and server infrastructure for our new location. So, what ever we purchase will need to go online immediately and support the company in a new location. I don't have the "test-bed" to test anything.
As you can also guess, via my title, I am not a MIS person either. So, I've been going through a fairly steep learning curve in many areas. I am weary about compatibility issues with NFS and our engineering/CAD Sun machines. In this area, I feel because of their industry experience, NetApp has the edge. I've talked with EMC on this issue, and they re-assure me that the IP4700 will not have compatibility problems. However, this is much different than having users of the product claim that their are no compatibility problems.
My gut feeling is to go with the F740 because of the existing installation base, and the maturity of the product. I'm just a little miffed that NetApp has been trying to use my inexperience and limited knowledgebase against me during the sales process; it doesn't give me the feeling that I can trust them.
Chris Van Genderen Software Engineer & Applications Manager NexFlash Technologies, Inc. chris_van_genderen@nexflash.com
"Bruce Sterling To: <toasters@mathworks.com>, <Chris_Van_Genderen@NexFlash.com> Woodcock" cc: (bcc: Chris Van Genderen/Santa Clara/ISSIHQ) <sirbruce@ix.n Subject: Re: EMC IP4700 vs NetApp F740 etcom.com> 05/09/01 03:45 PMMost of what you seem to be weighing are nebulous issues of who says what. Why don't you just find out for yourself?
Ask Netapp for an F760 to try out for 2 weeks.
Ask EMC for an IP4700 *at the equivalent price and disk capacity, with RAID* to try out for 2 weeks.
See which has better performance for your users and which you can administer easier. Build large RAID groups, test simultaneous file sharing from NFS and CIFS, fail drives, do rebuilds, etc.
Bruce