Can anyone rationalize this statement?
I will try to rationalize...bear in mind this is rationalization.
I've been looking a lot at writeups on these "new" systems with fibre channel. There are new companies claiming to have systems that do both block, and file serving. The established companies are claiming the same. But, all of these are basically a SAN system with fibre channel. One claims they'll use anything, fc, 10gig ethernet, etc. They are writing them up as keeping the system centralized at one spot. And I would venture to guess, the control is kept at that one spot. Or at least that is what they are trying to "sell" to the customers. This is the best rationalization I could think of...
This also brings up a question of mine. Upon looking at drawings of these "new" systems. The look like monsters. They got all kinds of fc switches, routers, hubs, servers. They look to me to be designed to be a very expensive, inadequate, complicated solution to a companies storage needs. And I have no information that one of them can deliver files as well as any ntap solution. Now it appears to me that ntap's solution with "backup" is approaching the needs in a much simpler, less expensive, better way. I only haven't found out yet how well the "backup" or the direction of thinking of ntaps in "backup" does in delivering blocks of data? I would appreciate some input or pointing in the right direction on this?
BirdDog |
