On 2006-11-22 at 08:40 +1300, Raj Patel wrote:

At the moment the NetApp is the most familiar to me as I have used one of their NAS boxes before and the simulator provides a pretty good indication of how it works. However the iSCSI seems a bit of a 'bolt-on' and its not clear if it will handle tiered storage as well as the other vendors (then again does it matter?).

The HDS & EMC are unknown quantities (other than what I can glean from the web).

When I looked about a year ago, the EMC Clariions (sp?) didn't directly handle iSCSI; instead, you use a Celerra NAS head which also provides iSCSI. This means that if you provision an iSCSI LUN, it exists as an item in a filesystem which lives in a native LUN dedicated to the NAS unit and the EMC CX box has no separate visibility of it. It's an either/or proposition. Your migration path is to have enough storage to allocate a new native LUN and migrate the data via the clients. This was a CX500, if memory serves.

With the NetApp kit, the NetApp folks were very clear that an iSCSI LUN is visible where you configure it to be visible and if you want to switch from iSCSI to fibre channel then it was a matter of changing the configured interfaces; the LUN remained visible with the same content.

I never really tested the NetApp iSCSI functionality though, but I'm strongly inclined to believe NetApp that this migration works -- it's consistent with what I understand of the design.

-Phil

Greetings,

I've had first hand experience with Netapp 270s / iSCSI on couple of windows host. (past life)

Nutshell: SLOW, don't try exchange on it, it kept timing out on me. I've also seen a large client have issues with Lotus notes when using Gfilers 980c and HDS as the backend storage. (this was a poor configuration issue, too many LUNs over a 1 gig connection)

I've also tried it for another purposes and I lost my LUN a few times. The only way of getting it back then was by restarting the client! not a fun thing to do when you are running multiple apps on the same server.

Suggestion would be, directly attach application servers via GigE across to your iSCSI device. If direct connecting your app servers is not realistic. use VLANs to segregate traffic, dedicate iSCSI traffic to a set of bonded ports.

Start slow, make sure that the number of LUNs being provisioned to the app servers are provisioned in a control manner. (meaning, see how your application behaves in a controlled environment before doing any big role out) Monitor performance, use a testing tool (iozone) to see how much performance you would gain or loose from moving away from current solution.

Also, consider the advantages and disadvantages an iSCSI solution would bring your environment. (replication, HA, speed, easy of management, backup, etc)

TOE ? I think that the purpose of having iSCSI in your environment is to lower the investment of FC (SAN) solution by leveraging your current network infrastructure and current staff expertise so, if you start purchasing the TOE cards, you will in fact start cutting into the savings a properly architected and managed IP SAN (iscsi) solution would offer your company.

I have not had the opportunity to try a TOE card nor have I needed it to yet since I am able to reach almost wire speeds on GigE at the moment.

Can not comment on the HDS and EMC solutions but I can't believe they would be better than what Netapp has to offer since their main business is in the FC world.

Hope this helps guide you!

Best Regards,

Julio Calderon West Region - Systems Engineer

agami http://www.agami.com/ 1269 Innsbruck Drive http://maps.google.com/maps?q=1269+Innsbruck+Drive%2CSunnyvale%2CCA+940 89%2CUSA&hl=en Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA Work: 408.349.0414 Mobile: 408.394.5638 Fax: 408.349.0393 Email: jcalderon@agami.com IM: juliocus (Yahoo)

Want a signature like this? http://www.linkedin.com/e/sig/2105155/ ________________________________

From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Raj Patel Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 11:40 AM To: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: iSCSI SAN Queries

Hi,

We're in the preliminary scoping phase for a low/mid-range iSCSI SAN solution. I was wondering if anyone had any positive or negative real-world experiences with -

NetApp 270c HDS AMS200 EMC CX320

At the moment the NetApp is the most familiar to me as I have used one of their NAS boxes before and the simulator provides a pretty good indication of how it works. However the iSCSI seems a bit of a 'bolt-on' and its not clear if it will handle tiered storage as well as the other vendors (then again does it matter?).

The HDS & EMC are unknown quantities (other than what I can glean from the web).

Any feedback concerning ease of use, expansion, licensing, snapshot mechanism (the EMC seems clunky from their literature but I don't know if that's the case in operation).

Also does anyone have any iSCSI 'gotchas' ? Is a TOE one of those 'nice to have but not really necessary' things on a modern server or should it be factored into the solution ?

Cheers, Raj.