SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: DownSouth who wrote (37781)1/11/2001 11:27:30 AM
From: Knight  Read Replies (1) of 54805
 
Let me see if I understand then...

So, in other words, NTAP could go into an existing shop that's running a Fibre Channel SAN, install the NTAP filers and have them run over the existing Fibre Channel "plumbing." In this case, the NTAP filers would serve files to the FC-connected servers in a manner that would be similar (in some ways) to the way traditional NFS servers served files to systems via remote mounts over traditional TCP/IP networks, but with two extremely important differences:

1) Remote NFS mounts were never good for applications that required reliable filesystem writes due to cache coherency issues. For example: database vendors always required database storage to be directly attached (via SCSI or SCSI over FC). NTAP's filers eliminate these caching issues. Also, their filers, I believe, are the only NAS devices supported by all the major RDBMS vendors for "non-direct-attach" access. (Is this still the case, DownSouth?)

2) Remote NFS mounts were also undesirable for mission-critical applications because TCP/IP I/O was much too slow and required much more server overhead than direct SCSI I/O. WAFL addresses the performance issue by offloading much of the filesystem processing from the host. (Downsouth, any idea how fibre-channel-attached NTAP filers' I/O performance/overhead compares to I/O performance of "direct-attach" SCSI-over-fibre-channel storage via traditional filesystems?)
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News