- Your Usable Capacity May Vary - Chuck conducts a thought deployment comparing EMC, HP and NetApp usable space for a 120 disk Exchange deployment. And while he glosses over a couple perhaps non-minor issues (RAID-5 vs RAID-DP and whether EMC’s snapshots are adequately performant), he does hit one of NetApp’s weak spots dead on: Usable capacity, particularly on LUNs if you follow the 100% space reservation recommendation. (Being a NetApp admin these days, I can’t really comment on what he writes about HP - it’s been a long time since I’ve touched that StorageWorks stuff - and I can only repeat what I’ve heard others say about EMC.) More Chuck on this here.
- How to License Windows VMs in a Non Microsoft Virtual Environment: Why Windows Server 2008 Datacenter Edition may be the best choice. (Seen at blog.scottlowe.org.)
- Welcome - My friend, NetApp’s Vaughan Stewart: Chad Sakac highlights some flaws in NetApp’s TR-3697 (”Performance Report: Multiprotocol Performance Test of VMware® ESX 3.5 on NetApp Storage Systems”):
What’s the scoop with:
* 4K/8K IO size only
* 2Gbps FC
* You guys have “throughput/IOPs” shown only in relative, not in absolute.
* 84 144GB drives with 16 VMs driving the IOMeter workloads with * 10GB of data each on them = 1.3% utilization (rounding up!).
-
« Home
Pages
-
RSS Feeds
Post a Comment