We've 
typically seen performance increases when moving from local storage to the 
filer.
 
What 
kind of pipe are you using?  If you're using 100 Mbps Ethernet, you'll see 
a performance hit since that's at best 8 MB/sec network throughput, which is 
trivial compared to local attach.  If you are using gigabit Ethernet you 
should see excellent performance.
 
Also 
how many disks are you using?  Just like with local storage, more spindles 
= better performance.
 
Are 
you using a private (or at least dedicated) network connection for the SQL 
Server to filer connection?  If you're sending SQL queries to the box on 
the same interface that is talking to the filer that could cause significant 
performance degradation.
 
Finally are you using OLTP or OLAP databases with the filer? (i.e. random 
or sequential reads?)  NetApp folks might disagree but I think WAFL is a 
bad thing to mix with OLAP if you're using snapshots.  It's great, 
absolutely phenomenal for OLTP, but sequential reads are not a filer's 
strong point (that's why it's called write ANYWHERE file layout, not "Write In 
Order and Minimize Fragmentation File Layout").  
 
(Please no flames on how WAFL minimizes fragmentation--if you're 
using snapshots and you change any data in a database, the new data will be 
written elsewhere than the original disk location, causing the head to jump 
around like mad during what should be sequential reads.  A copy-on-write 
snapshot would be MUCH better in this scenario.)
 
Tell 
us more about your configuration so we can try to figure out why you're seeing 
problems.  Also try pinging your sales rep, NetApp has people dedicated to 
making SQL Server work well with filers and I'm sure you could get some pointers 
from them.
 
MD
 
  Has anyone placed a SQL database on a filer and 
  seen a significant performance increase of 10% or more or a 
  performance decrease of 10% or more? 
  Our initial test of a source change management application using a SQL 
  database on our filer showed a significant decrease in performance to the tune 
  of 2-3 times slower than a local storage array.  We understand ours 
  wasn't an apples to apples comparison but we weren't expecting the difference 
  to be this great. 
  
Has anyone else experienced a similar story where they have seen 
  negative/positive results they would like to share? 
  
Our filer is a model F840.