Unix_NT_Consultant
asked on
ISCSI versus SAN
Would like to know opinions. I have been using EMC's DMX/Clariion etc. My management has asked me to look for alternatives to EMC (due to the price and attitude).
Looking at ISCSI seems to be much cheaper, less infrastructure costs and no additional personnel to manage my switches since we have the network folks to manage the network.
Also, which company's are on the forefront.
Please advise.
UNC
Looking at ISCSI seems to be much cheaper, less infrastructure costs and no additional personnel to manage my switches since we have the network folks to manage the network.
Also, which company's are on the forefront.
Please advise.
UNC
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
IBM has an array of offerings in iSCSI and SAN's both. I also think IBM has a good global support too(so making it easy to get support where ever u are).
I also like iSCSI but it might be a good idea to do an evaluation first. Figure out things like level of service, up time, current and future amount of storage needed, backup. For example streaming video needs very high through put and so you have to make sure the iSCSI offering will be able to provide that level of service. There are iSCSI controlers that have a processor on board to handle the overhead associated with IP. They can greatly increase the throughput and the cost. I'm not familure with HDS but it sounds like might be a good fit for what you need. It would also be good to speak with HP because they are coming out with a lower cost SAN offering that might be a good fit. One last thought the more you know about your needs the better they will be able to help you and the more likely your project will succeed, so do the background work.
The current comanies with availible products in iSCSI Storage are:
Eurologic and Intransa and NetApp.
If the loading on your server CPU is of importance on the host side,
There is Intel, Adaptac, Alacritech, and QLogic.
Eurologic and Intransa and NetApp.
If the loading on your server CPU is of importance on the host side,
There is Intel, Adaptac, Alacritech, and QLogic.
Clarification:
iSCSI is SAN.
SAN and FC have become synonyms over the years,
but FC was the protocol of choice for SAN
with iSCSI being the alternative protocol for SAN now.
iSCSI is SAN.
SAN and FC have become synonyms over the years,
but FC was the protocol of choice for SAN
with iSCSI being the alternative protocol for SAN now.
I am in the middle of evaluating SANS from several vendors. I've ruled out ISCSI at this point as I don't beleive the product it "there" yet and I will never put mission critical apps on bleading edge technology.
Using more traditional SANS with Fiber Channel Drives and SATA drives, I've looked at EMC, HP and Hitachi. Thus far, Hitachi seems to be the price leader offering more storage and higher throughput for less money.
Using more traditional SANS with Fiber Channel Drives and SATA drives, I've looked at EMC, HP and Hitachi. Thus far, Hitachi seems to be the price leader offering more storage and higher throughput for less money.
Da Proff