[Y2Krang]

Hi Everyone.

This is my first post with MSFN. My question is about SAN's. I need to know what sort of SAN's you would recommend and the cost. I have a budget of £40k to spend on a SAN for the company I work for. But. Where do I start.

I am asking anyone with any experience with them to voice your opinion. Which one do you have experience with? Was it worth it? Have you heard of any better ones? I see the likes of Dell offering SAN solutions, are they any good?

In an ideal world we would like Redundancy, Scalibility, Backup and to have two sites linked with fibre. But in reality £40k may not be nearly enough. Any ideas anyone.

Thanks in advance...

[ripken204]

i have no experience with it but give this a read
http://en.wikipedia....ge_area_network

[Zxian]

What exactly is this for? If anything, get a SAN made by the same manufacturer that made your servers (if possible). You'll likely run into less compatibility errors that way.

A little more detail would help.

[cluberti]

SANs go from very cheap (like the low-end EMCs offered by Dell) to the tens of millions of dollars. What is this for, and do you really need a SAN, or are you looking for a NAS (network-attached storage)?

[ripken204]

it sounds like he wants SAN, but i only read the wiki article for a few min.

[Y2Krang]

Hi all,

Thanks for replying.

A NAS is not what I need. I work in an airport where I would like to have 2 sites linked with fibre, that constantly communicate and synchronise their data. I have heard about running server operating systems off a SAN also and have it so that when you lose a server, another box can take over. I may be talking about the million dollar solutions without realising it though. Thahs not really important either ATM. But what we really need is a SAN solution that can replicate data between two sites, have a good backup solution and make it one we can expand in the future.

I will look more into Dell, as all our servers are Dell. Does this really help the situation, having the sane manufacturer for servers and SAN?

Thanks Ripken, I will have a look at that wiki also

Good work, I have plenty to read for now

[rendrag]

Having the same "manufacturer" of your servers and your storage solution eliminates the "it's not the server, it's your storage box" and "it's not the storage box, it's your server" problem. That alone is worth something. They also guarantee compatibility.

[cluberti]

Y2Krang, on Jun 5 2007, 04:32 AM, said:

I work in an airport where I would like to have 2 sites linked with fibre, that constantly communicate and synchronise their data. I have heard about running server operating systems off a SAN also and have it so that when you lose a server, another box can take over. I may be talking about the million dollar solutions without realising it though. Thahs not really important either ATM. But what we really need is a SAN solution that can replicate data between two sites, have a good backup solution and make it one we can expand in the future.

Sounds like you want a multinode cluster with a SAN backend over fiber, yes?

[p4ntb0y]

We have just recently installed a SAN Solution over two sites with Cluster servers for failover and ESX to run some Virtuals I believe that the cost was under 30K not including software.

Odviously it will depend on what size disks your require and the connection between your site.

I am in the UK if you want to PM me I will see If I can dig out the quotes and docs for it.

We used HP MSA 1000 one at each site. with 2x DL380 G5's at each site these run very fast I am very impressed with them so far.

It sounds to me you need a entry to mid-range solution I think 40K is well in your sights.
PS Dont forget to budget in your backup solution mayeb a LTO3 Autoloader depending on the amount of space you need.

What excalty are you doing anyways? as there is more than one way to do things.