Re: SAN storage

  • From: "Mark Brinsmead" <pythianbrinsmead@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: andrew.kerber@xxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 22:09:02 -0700

That's the old saying about most hardware (and often software):

    "Fast; reliable; cheap:  choose any two."

It's been years since I last shopped for storage in a serious way but for
storage, I can't help but suspect that you may need to add a fourth
dimension:  "scalable".  That would make the saying more like:

    "Fast; reliable; cheap; scalable:  choose any three."

That is to say, if you are looking for a storage array that you can
(affordably) deploy with sub-terabyte storage capacity, and then "scale" to
many terabytes within a single box, you're likely to pay a premium for that
ability.  If, however, you are willing to use multiple storage devices, you
can probably get similar (or better!) performance and equal reliability for
a (comparatively) good price.

When reviewing and comparing products, one might find it worthwhile to
compare the cost (and benefits) of using one enormous disk array versus four
or eight or even 16 small to medium disk arrays.

On Feb 6, 2008 7:49 AM, Andrew Kerber <andrew.kerber@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> There are only three factors, in whatever order is important to you:
> -speed, price, and reliability.
> I have worked with EMC and Hitachi on Solaris, and been happy with both.
> On Feb 5, 2008 5:55 PM, Prasad <p4cldba@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > I have a Oracle 10gR2 database on Solaris 9 which is going to be few TB
> > in 6 months time  . and my manager wants me to come up with some
> > recommendation  for a SAN storage .so Please advise me on what you think can
> > be a best storage solution
> > and also what are the key factors that one should look into before
> > deciding on which SAN vendors to choose from?
> >
> > Thanks in Advance
> >
> > regards
> > _Prasad
> >
> >
> --
> Andrew W. Kerber
> 'If at first you dont succeed, dont take up skydiving.'

-- Mark Brinsmead
  Senior DBA,
  The Pythian Group

Other related posts: