topic Re: MSA storage array performance SATA vs Fiber channel in MSA Storage

MSA storage array performance SATA vs Fiber channel

Subentu — Fri, 06 Feb 2015 12:46:28 GMT

Hi guys,

I have to buy a MSA storage array for our data center (for data warehouse storage), and I have three options:

1. Fiber Channel
2. SATA
3. SCSI

How do I know what option suits me best? Can you guys point me where I can find the comparison between these technologies.

Thanks in advance

P.S. This thread ahs been moved from General to Storage Area Networks (SAN) (Small and Medium Business). - Hp Forum Moderator

Re: MSA storage array performance SATA vs Fiber channel

Torsten. — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 09:23:12 GMT

There are so many different MSA's!

20/30/50/60/70/1000/1500/2000 ...

Re: MSA storage array performance SATA vs Fiber channel

Subentu — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 09:27:14 GMT

Sorry, My bad.

We are going for a MSA500

Re: MSA storage array performance SATA vs Fiber channel

Johan Guldmyr — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 05:46:59 GMT

MSA500 is sooo old.

What about the new P2000 G3 that has asynchronous replication possibilities?

Re: MSA storage array performance SATA vs Fiber channel

Víctor Cespón — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 10:33:45 GMT

1. Fiber Channel
Not worth the money, all the storage enclosures are moving to SAS/SATA now. We have 3 and 6 Gb/s interfaces now.

2. SATA
You get more GB per $, but they are slow, and should not be used for databases, operating systems or any other application that is constantly writting to the disks. Use them for huge amounts of data that is seldom accessed.

3. SCSI
They are SAS now, 15K rpm. Those are the fast disks that are usually used for operating systems, databases and other high throughput applications.

Re: MSA storage array performance SATA vs Fiber channel

Torsten. — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 10:40:36 GMT

>> 1. Fiber Channel
Not worth the money, all the storage enclosures are moving to SAS/SATA now. We have 3 and 6 Gb/s interfaces now.

I would say, the "move" is to have fiber channel at front end (because of the SAN), SAS/SATA at backend (internal).

Re: MSA storage array performance SATA vs Fiber channel

Johan Guldmyr — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 11:42:31 GMT

iSCSI isn't mentioned.

Maybe that's what you meant with SCSI Subentu?

In the case of iSCSI -
Usually considered a cheaper alternative as you don't _have to_ use a special network card on the server (there are iSCSI accelerators that offloads the CPU), it doesn't _require_ a separate network although a dedicated vlan/subnet is recommended.

There might be some performance limitations to take in mind in the iSCSI.
Checked the quickspecs for the P2000 G3 and the iSCSI interfaces are 1gbit and two per controller so you would get max 4gbit per MSA.

FC and SAS you would get more, but then again you would have to have a few disk enclosures to even get close to maxing the FC/SAS interfaces.

More information about the MSAs:
http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF25a/12169-304616-241493-241493-241493-4118559.html

Re: MSA storage array performance SATA vs Fiber channel

Víctor Cespón — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 14:56:29 GMT

You can have all the combinations.

MSA20 + MSA1500 = SATA + FC
MSA20 + MSA1510i = SATA + iSCSI
MSA30 + MSA1500 = SCSI + FC
EVA + MPX100 = FC + iSCSI
There are 3 MSA2000 models: FC, iSCSI or SAS. Same disks, different output cable.