NAS Management

EMC Control Center has more management tools for Network Appliance filers than they do for their own hardware.

I wonder if this means they prefer the NetApp devices?


Skip to comment form

    • on October 17, 2006 at 5:30 pm
    • Reply

    Or it means ECC is very popular in NetApp shops. One wonders if it might be *more* popular amongst NetApp customers than Storage Suite. 😉

  1. I’d thought of that, but EMC doesn’t usually sell *JUST* ECC, it’s usually part of a package. (Of course, if you bought a Symm for the big storage and NetApp for the NFS/CIFS storage, you’d be in the ball park.

    Besides – when you’re produce hardware *AND* software, you always support your own hardware first, then build in the competitors stuff to keep the heterogenious customers happy.

    ECC’s management of Clariion is spotty at best, and using a Symm for NAS is like killing a mosquito with a cannon-ball. You’re throwing way too much VERY EXPENSIVE storage at a system that will never be able to utilize the performance.

    I can’t say I’m unhappy with Celerra as a file-server. We have a single data-mover pushing over 2TB of filesystems out to the network right now.

    • on November 28, 2006 at 2:41 pm
    • Reply

    We have several Celerra NS704Gs in our infrastructure. 4 data movers with Clariion and Symm backends. They are a real beast to set up and we have recently tried deploying MPFS (HighRoad). Eeeek! I’d say Celerras (even the non-gateway appliances) are way too much overhead for most companies and EMC has to make their homogeneous software work with what sells in the market place. EMC has straight up fiber channel down but their NAS stuff could use some work…

  2. We only have the one NS500G, it’s kind of a toy but I have to admit has performed admirably with the 2.5TB of data we’ve got behind it. (And I just put in a P.O. for another 6TB usable to add to it for longer-term archiving.)

    I could ask for some alert when the storage pool gets low. I’ve got my filesytems set to auto-extend when they hit 90% capacity, and I get an email when that happens, but it seems the only way I am notified that the Storage pool has filled is when I get the subsequent emails when a filesystem goes up beyond 90%. (I seem to get one every percentage point the FS climbs)

    The other thing I hate, is that in order to do a competent split-mirror backup I’m going to need another NS501G (single datamover). Because we can’t use NDMP (Our company policy is Disk–>disk–>tape, and the “disk–>tape–>disk” process would be cumbersome at best) I’m stuck dedicating a single Gig-E port for backups, exporting the filesystems down that port, and backing them up as \\server\c$\filesystem\* , which is just not the quickest way to run backups when there are better alternatives. A snap backup to an NS501 followed by sucking the backup down a 4G etherchannel would at least be marginally better.

    It’s about time Veritas gets with EMC and writes a Celerra agent for NBU don’t you think?

  3. was interesting .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.