- Community Home
- >
- Storage
- >
- Entry Storage Systems
- >
- Disk Enclosures
- >
- XP12000 - Direct Connect or SAN Attach?
Disk Enclosures
1753578
Members
6247
Online
108796
Solutions
Forums
Categories
Company
Local Language
юдл
back
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Forums
Discussions
юдл
back
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Blogs
Information
Community
Resources
Community Language
Language
Forums
Blogs
Topic Options
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО12-16-2004 02:12 AM
тАО12-16-2004 02:12 AM
XP12000 - Direct Connect or SAN Attach?
Our use of a SAN merely centers on the ability to have more server connections (which is a non-issue) and "move" disks around (presenting LUNS to servers on the fly - which can be done "in-array" by LUN-multipathing or presenting LUNS to more than one CHIP port - in effect to more than one server).
I am aware of the significant difference in cost between switch ports and CHIP ports but notwithstanding:
1. Is there any other advantage to using a SAN than directly attaching (1 Array port per Server HBA). We're not using any SAN based backup.. out Tape Infra will be on a different SAN and uses the backup server's bus in moving data from disk to tapes.
2. Our environments are VERY I/O intensive - will a direct attach to the XP have considerable advantage over a SAN connection? Will a direct attachment to an XP be loop (AL) or Point to Point?
I am aware of the significant difference in cost between switch ports and CHIP ports but notwithstanding:
1. Is there any other advantage to using a SAN than directly attaching (1 Array port per Server HBA). We're not using any SAN based backup.. out Tape Infra will be on a different SAN and uses the backup server's bus in moving data from disk to tapes.
2. Our environments are VERY I/O intensive - will a direct attach to the XP have considerable advantage over a SAN connection? Will a direct attachment to an XP be loop (AL) or Point to Point?
Hakuna Matata.
2 REPLIES 2
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО12-16-2004 03:37 AM
тАО12-16-2004 03:37 AM
Re: XP12000 - Direct Connect or SAN Attach?
Is Direct Attachment even supported on the XP line? I know it is not suported on the MSA and the EVA, but am unfamiliar with the XP.
I would think that, if support is not an issues, directly attaching your hosts to your storage would have some performance increase over using a switch, but not so much difference that it would be worthwhile to use the storage directly attached.
Obviously, Direct attachment might make sense if you only have 1 or 2 servers (Which is IBM's stance as the DS4000 line allows 1 to 4 direct attached hosts depending on the model).
Steven
I would think that, if support is not an issues, directly attaching your hosts to your storage would have some performance increase over using a switch, but not so much difference that it would be worthwhile to use the storage directly attached.
Obviously, Direct attachment might make sense if you only have 1 or 2 servers (Which is IBM's stance as the DS4000 line allows 1 to 4 direct attached hosts depending on the model).
Steven
Steven Clementi
HP Master ASE, Storage, Servers, and Clustering
MCSE (NT 4.0, W2K, W2K3)
VCP (ESX2, Vi3, vSphere4, vSphere5, vSphere 6.x)
RHCE
NPP3 (Nutanix Platform Professional)
HP Master ASE, Storage, Servers, and Clustering
MCSE (NT 4.0, W2K, W2K3)
VCP (ESX2, Vi3, vSphere4, vSphere5, vSphere 6.x)
RHCE
NPP3 (Nutanix Platform Professional)
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО12-16-2004 03:44 AM
тАО12-16-2004 03:44 AM
Re: XP12000 - Direct Connect or SAN Attach?
Steven,
The XP line is basically a Hitachi array as you probably know already. We've an old HDS9960/XP512 (but still superbly working) that is simply direct attached - FC-AL - to each server. Am not sure though if an XP once connected to a fabric is essentially a loop (AL) connection.
What we do as far as split mirror backups is concerned is that the LUNS that will be the split mirror LUNs are presented to more than one server - so we can move the VxVM diskgroup around. Simply split off the VxVM diskgroup and deport from prod server and import it on to the server that needs it.. ie. a backup server or DSS/Test server - all done without a SAN. That's the beauty of this feature multi-pathing feature of XP/HDS arrays.
The XP line is basically a Hitachi array as you probably know already. We've an old HDS9960/XP512 (but still superbly working) that is simply direct attached - FC-AL - to each server. Am not sure though if an XP once connected to a fabric is essentially a loop (AL) connection.
What we do as far as split mirror backups is concerned is that the LUNS that will be the split mirror LUNs are presented to more than one server - so we can move the VxVM diskgroup around. Simply split off the VxVM diskgroup and deport from prod server and import it on to the server that needs it.. ie. a backup server or DSS/Test server - all done without a SAN. That's the beauty of this feature multi-pathing feature of XP/HDS arrays.
Hakuna Matata.
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Hewlett Packard Enterprise. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation.
News and Events
Support
© Copyright 2024 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP