Any forums out there about SAN's ?.

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 11:20:38 -0000, "Fatboy40" no one here, sorry
wrote:

Faeandar,

For me it's all about the best components at the cheapest price and to be
honest it really should be SCSI for the disks otherwise I know I'm asking
for trouble.

My no. 1 choice is the EMC CX300 but I think that's out of my league, my no.
2 now seems to be the HP MSA1000 (specifically the kit version they produce
with a switch and two HBA's (which seem to be rebranded Qlogic)).

I think I'll start a seperate thread about the HP hardware to see if anyone
has any opinions on it (and use Google Groups for research), for around
£10,000 I could setup a pretty good SAN using the MSA1000 and HP
resellers/support companies are all over the place and at a later date add
backup switches/controllers etc..

"Faeandar" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 09:39:24 -0000, "Fatboy40" no one here, sorry
wrote:

I think this is the perfect forum, and honestly it could use more
traffic so post away....

I didn't catch how large you wanted to make this but unless you're
really tied to EMC or HP there are alot of other array mfg's that make
very good array's. And all that makes a SAN is the switch, so buy
what you can get or what is supported. Brocade, McData, and Cisco fit
just about everyone's support matrix.

~F


I'm not sure why you only see those 2 as viable options. Why not
Nexsan, or Xiotech, or LSI Logic, or any of a number of decent array
vendors? There are a lot of vendors out there with good components at
very good prices. In fact I'm surprised you have EMC in the cheap
category. Maybe their finally getting back the screw job they've been
handing out all these years and having to give away their stuff. But
that's a personal rant...

In any case, unless you are limited by vendor scarcity in your area I
would open up my potential candidates were I you.

~F

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 17:56:54 +0300, "Maxim S. Shatskih"
wrote:

Hitachi and Seagate are the common 15K drives.

Hitachi? Ex-IBM UltraStars?

Don't get hung up on the line names (in this case, "Ultrastar"). The
drives are generally very different between models.

But yes, 15K73 and 15K146 drives.

Malc.

"Fatboy40" no one here, sorry wrote in message
...
Wolf,

I have to ask the question ... ATA and a good support contract or SCSI and
a
lower class of support ... I presume that each could cost as much as the
other (more expensive contract v. extra startup costs of SCSI).

Personnaly I'm still in the SCSI camp, when the business is on the line
(and
my neck is as well) I know which I feel safer with.

When I first saw these commodity boxes, I came back and told my
office mate about them. He began the litany of reasons why we
could never use them: Reliability and performance were at the
top of the list. I told him it came with a 3 years bumper-to-bumper
service-so all he had to do was break it. As we went through our
testing process he fell in love with it.

To answer your question, I will almost always err on the support side.
Good support will buy me breathing room. Last Christmas Eve (WED),
at 6:30 PM, I lost a disk array. The fibre disk enclosure went south. I
called this vendor (was not their disk array) and got a loaner enclosure
(different manufacturer-Sun) delivered first thing Friday AM (has we
asked for delivery Wed night they would have delivered it). At the same
time I filled out a form with enclosure's manufacturer for documentation
and received a pdf through email 10 days later.

Support is king.

--
Wolf
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please post all responses to UseNet. All email cheerfully and automagically
routed to Dave Null

"flux" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Malcolm Weir wrote:

The company that I'm using to post this tried a few. They sucked.
And Apple has no idea how to support serious operations. Their
response seems to be "reformat/reinit and try again".

An obviously fabricated tale.

Maybe, maybe not. The point it you should test it in your environment
BEFORE you buy it. Then it won't suck. Or it will suck but you can
live with it.


--
Wolf
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please post all responses to UseNet. All email cheerfully and automagically
routed to Dave Null

In article ,
Malcolm Weir wrote:

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 05:26:25 GMT, flux wrote:

In article ,
Malcolm Weir wrote:

The company that I'm using to post this tried a few. They sucked.
And Apple has no idea how to support serious operations. Their
response seems to be "reformat/reinit and try again".

An obviously fabricated tale.

Flux is not only infantile, but stupid and a liar.

How does my opinion about your tale, which I profess again to be
fabricated, make me a liar?

In article ,
Malcolm Weir wrote:

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 04:56:52 GMT, flux wrote:

In article ,
Malcolm Weir wrote:

The silly little boy doesn't understand the difference between the
Toshiba 1.8 inch MK2004GAL drives used in an iPod (3600rpm) and the
drives used in high-end storage (15,000rpm).

The difference is that Toshiba is like a Timex, takes a licking and
keeps on ticking. Now trying throwing one of these unnamed "high-end
storage" devices on the couch on a regular basis-sometimes while it's
spinning--and seeing how long it lasts.

Unnamed? Are you *really* this ignorant?

Where are the names?

Hitachi and Seagate are the common 15K drives.

As to your "point", why would anyone vaguely competent throw
enterprise storage on "the couch"? Where would a competent data
center employee *find* a couch in a data center?

I don't know. You tell us.

And I'm mightily amused at the idea of using 20gb or 40gb 3600 rpm
drives as data center storage!

Really?

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 06:32:55 GMT, flux wrote:

In article ,
Malcolm Weir wrote:

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 05:26:25 GMT, flux wrote:

In article ,
Malcolm Weir wrote:

The company that I'm using to post this tried a few. They sucked.
And Apple has no idea how to support serious operations. Their
response seems to be "reformat/reinit and try again".

An obviously fabricated tale.

Flux is not only infantile, but stupid and a liar.

How does my opinion about your tale, which I profess again to be
fabricated, make me a liar?

Because you stated it was "obviously" fabricated.

You may choose to think it was (and the grown-ups here will apply
suitable weight to your opinion), but the claim is not expressed as an
opinion. Still, we've established your feeble English skills, so I
suspect you miss the significance.

Anyway, I think you are liar, stupid, infantile.

And now run along and ask your mommy if you can read the link I
provided, fool!

Malc.

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 06:34:50 GMT, flux wrote:

In article ,
Malcolm Weir wrote:

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 04:56:52 GMT, flux wrote:

In article ,
Malcolm Weir wrote:

The silly little boy doesn't understand the difference between the
Toshiba 1.8 inch MK2004GAL drives used in an iPod (3600rpm) and the
drives used in high-end storage (15,000rpm).

The difference is that Toshiba is like a Timex, takes a licking and
keeps on ticking. Now trying throwing one of these unnamed "high-end
storage" devices on the couch on a regular basis-sometimes while it's
spinning--and seeing how long it lasts.

Unnamed? Are you *really* this ignorant?

Where are the names?

If you were any kind of storage professional, you'd not need the
names.

I did not, and do not, claim that I named the drives. I simply
observe that your belief that brand names are necessary demonstrates
your ignorance!

Hitachi and Seagate are the common 15K drives.

.... as you'd know if you had any knowledge or experience in the field.

As to your "point", why would anyone vaguely competent throw
enterprise storage on "the couch"? Where would a competent data
center employee *find* a couch in a data center?

I don't know. You tell us.

They wouldn't. That's point, you illogical buffoon.

And I'm mightily amused at the idea of using 20gb or 40gb 3600 rpm
drives as data center storage!

Really?

Yup. The price/gb and price/mb/sec are laughable.

Malc.

In article ,
Malcolm Weir wrote:

Unnamed? Are you *really* this ignorant?

Where are the names?

If you were any kind of storage professional, you'd not need the
names.

So why bring up the names?

I did not, and do not, claim that I named the drives. I simply
observe that your belief that brand names are necessary demonstrates
your ignorance!

So who named them then?


Hitachi and Seagate are the common 15K drives.

... as you'd know if you had any knowledge or experience in the field.

But I do.

As to your "point", why would anyone vaguely competent throw
enterprise storage on "the couch"? Where would a competent data
center employee *find* a couch in a data center?

I don't know. You tell us.

They wouldn't. That's point, you illogical buffoon.

So what's the point of mentioning that?

And I'm mightily amused at the idea of using 20gb or 40gb 3600 rpm
drives as data center storage!

Really?

Yup. The price/gb and price/mb/sec are laughable.

You think?

In article ,
Malcolm Weir wrote:

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 06:32:55 GMT, flux wrote:

In article ,
Malcolm Weir wrote:

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 05:26:25 GMT, flux wrote:

In article ,
Malcolm Weir wrote:

The company that I'm using to post this tried a few. They sucked.
And Apple has no idea how to support serious operations. Their
response seems to be "reformat/reinit and try again".

An obviously fabricated tale.

Flux is not only infantile, but stupid and a liar.

How does my opinion about your tale, which I profess again to be
fabricated, make me a liar?

Because you stated it was "obviously" fabricated.

It is *obviously* fabricated to me.

You may choose to think it was (and the grown-ups here will apply
suitable weight to your opinion),

Apparently they already have.

but the claim is not expressed as an
opinion.

It was and still is, but it is looking more and more like fact.