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: nnillionaire who wrote (7566)	4/6/2001 7:22:41 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10934

BlueArc claim they can support up to 250 TB, but their maximum cache size is stated as 7GB. This is a very poor ratio. This means that they will have to do more real, physical i/o's than other vendors. Couldn't they increase the maximum cache size? Tim

To: nnillionaire who wrote (7566)	4/6/2001 8:19:25 PM
From: Boplicity	Respond to of 10934

hmmm, BlueArc will be disk bound. Thanks, B

To: nnillionaire who wrote (7566)	4/7/2001 2:13:35 PM
From: DownSouth	Respond to of 10934

Thanks, nil. This poster supports my contention that NTAP's architecture and proprietary storage, retrieval, and clustering methods are probably superior to those of BlueArc. When NTAP's DAFS/VI architecture is added later this year, which offloads the inter host data transfer to the Network Interface, thus eliminating CPU and OS latency and IP stack overhead, I suspect that NTAP's performance (and capacity) will be superior to BlueArc, far more reliable, and with a competitive Total Cost of Ownership (TCO).