Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Technology Stocks : Network Appliance -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: D. K. G. who wrote (4180)	8/28/2000 10:33:49 PM
From: Gregory Rasp	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10934

I remember being told on the EMC board about a year ago that this sort of thing (Continental) is exactly what NAS was incapable of handling. Getting these high profile old economy companies to bite on NTAP has got to help the sales force make further inroads. Purchasing agents hate to take chances and break new ground. This should make it a little easier. GR

To: D. K. G. who wrote (4180)	8/28/2000 10:40:23 PM
From: DownSouth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10934

Thanks for the good find. This reminds me, the folks at SUNW talk about "snapshot" on their NAS product. Be aware that Sun's "snapshot" is merely a full backup with periodic incrementals. It is NOT anything like NTAP's SNAPSHOT, which is an inherent feature of the WAFL file system design. SNAPSHOT is not a copy of the file system at a point in time; it is a copy of the root inode at a point in time, pointing to all of the inodes at that point in time. So data blocks that are still in Snapshot directories are not deleted by the file system, though those data blocks may no longer be pointed to by subsequent inode directories because data in the block has changed. For a complete explanation see this: netapp.com (This paper is at least 5 years old and gives you the basics of NTAP's WAFL.)