Storage over 20TB - Storage

This is a discussion on Storage over 20TB - Storage ; Hello. We're looking at needing 20TB of storage for file sharing and increasing this up to 100TB over the next 2 years. What NAS server storage would people recommend - i've looked at net app but they seem very expensive. ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Storage over 20TB

  1. Storage over 20TB

    Hello. We're looking at needing 20TB of storage for file sharing and
    increasing this up to 100TB over the next 2 years. What NAS server storage
    would people recommend - i've looked at net app but they seem very
    expensive.

    Thankyou.


  2. Re: Storage over 20TB

    Keith,

    I would start talking to *a lot* of storage vendors, like Net App :

    - Hitachi
    - HP
    - EMC

    and many others.... search google !

    But just to set your expectations, growing to 100TB is a lot of data, not
    sure what you call *expensive*, but 100TB is not going to be cheap.
    Also, you might want to include DR / Backup-Restore solutions, as I am sure
    you don't have a 100TB backup capable solution laying around.

    Before talking to vendors, ensure you have your business requirements
    (including how often does data change, what is important, what back/restore
    timings are needed, DR requirements, High Availability requirements,
    performance requirements, data retention policies, # files, # users, #
    sites, type of files, type of data, application details,... and so on and so
    forth, this list is far from complete)

    After talking to a lot of vendors, make a XL sheet of capabilities and
    compare to your original requirements.

    Good Luck with your project
    Rgds,
    Edwin.

    "Keith" wrote in message
    news:OUjHk2$hHHA.3412@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
    > Hello. We're looking at needing 20TB of storage for file sharing and
    > increasing this up to 100TB over the next 2 years. What NAS server storage
    > would people recommend - i've looked at net app but they seem very
    > expensive.
    >
    > Thankyou.
    >




  3. Re: Storage over 20TB

    Hi Edwin,

    Thanks. What would you thoughts be on this kind of storage with Windows
    Storage Server and DFS? Instead of 1 say EMC NAS which scales to 60TB we
    could look at around 8 HP DL320s servers with 8TB storage. EMC would argue
    reliability but the HP servers are pretty solid and costs would be around
    1/8 of that for EMC.

    thanks.



    "Edwin vMierlo [MVP]" wrote in
    message news:ekArLEAiHHA.2368@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
    > Keith,
    >
    > I would start talking to *a lot* of storage vendors, like Net App :
    >
    > - Hitachi
    > - HP
    > - EMC
    >
    > and many others.... search google !
    >
    > But just to set your expectations, growing to 100TB is a lot of data, not
    > sure what you call *expensive*, but 100TB is not going to be cheap.
    > Also, you might want to include DR / Backup-Restore solutions, as I am
    > sure
    > you don't have a 100TB backup capable solution laying around.
    >
    > Before talking to vendors, ensure you have your business requirements
    > (including how often does data change, what is important, what
    > back/restore
    > timings are needed, DR requirements, High Availability requirements,
    > performance requirements, data retention policies, # files, # users, #
    > sites, type of files, type of data, application details,... and so on and
    > so
    > forth, this list is far from complete)
    >
    > After talking to a lot of vendors, make a XL sheet of capabilities and
    > compare to your original requirements.
    >
    > Good Luck with your project
    > Rgds,
    > Edwin.
    >
    > "Keith" wrote in message
    > news:OUjHk2$hHHA.3412@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
    >> Hello. We're looking at needing 20TB of storage for file sharing and
    >> increasing this up to 100TB over the next 2 years. What NAS server
    >> storage
    >> would people recommend - i've looked at net app but they seem very
    >> expensive.
    >>
    >> Thankyou.
    >>

    >
    >



  4. Re: Storage over 20TB

    See, if you choose EMC NAS solution, you don't need a Windows Storage
    Server, as it is already a NAS.
    But that is not the question you should be asking.

    I am not in a position to give you a comparisson between 8 HP servers and
    EMC NAS.
    This because I am a bit EMC biassed, and because I have no HP server
    experience with 100TB of data.
    ( I do have very good experiences with EMC NAS solutions, with a lot of data
    on them )

    Again, it is not just "price tag" or "it has 100TB" you need to look at, you
    need to get your business requirements documented, then look at the feature
    set of HP servers, and EMC NAS.

    I don't think you should *just* look at *raw file storage/sharing* but need
    to look at *what else*
    - backup / restore
    - DR
    - performance
    - proven track record reliability / stability
    - data cloning / snapping / replication
    - scalability out/up (after your 2 year / 100TB... what then ?)
    - hardware software life-cycle (e.g. do you need to replace
    equipment/software after 3 years)
    - .... and many more .... (such as your business requirements)

    Ask yourself what your businees needs first, then go out to suppliers, not
    the other way around.
    It seems to me that you already went to your suppliers with the "I need
    100TB, please quote" question, really ask yourself and your co-workes of
    what is really needed. And let them build a solution which includes all your
    requirements.

    And I would not only talk to 2 suppliers, I would talk to 5/6 initially,
    then make a short list of 2/3 talk to those again, then choose your winner.

    Again, a 100TB is a lot of data, you want to make sure that YOU know what
    all this data is, when it changes, where it goes, who uses it, and for what,
    how to backup, what are the users expectations of restore, what are the
    business expectations of restore, SOX (ouch, dirty word)....

    If you just want to store lots of files, and hope for the best, then that is
    fine as well.
    Go with what you think holds the data and is the cheapest.
    This is not my advice, I would call this a recipe for dissaster.

    rgds,
    Edwin.



    "Keith" wrote in message
    news:%2366hYQBiHHA.3452@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
    > Hi Edwin,
    >
    > Thanks. What would you thoughts be on this kind of storage with Windows
    > Storage Server and DFS? Instead of 1 say EMC NAS which scales to 60TB we
    > could look at around 8 HP DL320s servers with 8TB storage. EMC would argue
    > reliability but the HP servers are pretty solid and costs would be around
    > 1/8 of that for EMC.
    >
    > thanks.
    >
    >
    >
    > "Edwin vMierlo [MVP]" wrote in
    > message news:ekArLEAiHHA.2368@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
    > > Keith,
    > >
    > > I would start talking to *a lot* of storage vendors, like Net App :
    > >
    > > - Hitachi
    > > - HP
    > > - EMC
    > >
    > > and many others.... search google !
    > >
    > > But just to set your expectations, growing to 100TB is a lot of data,

    not
    > > sure what you call *expensive*, but 100TB is not going to be cheap.
    > > Also, you might want to include DR / Backup-Restore solutions, as I am
    > > sure
    > > you don't have a 100TB backup capable solution laying around.
    > >
    > > Before talking to vendors, ensure you have your business requirements
    > > (including how often does data change, what is important, what
    > > back/restore
    > > timings are needed, DR requirements, High Availability requirements,
    > > performance requirements, data retention policies, # files, # users, #
    > > sites, type of files, type of data, application details,... and so on

    and
    > > so
    > > forth, this list is far from complete)
    > >
    > > After talking to a lot of vendors, make a XL sheet of capabilities and
    > > compare to your original requirements.
    > >
    > > Good Luck with your project
    > > Rgds,
    > > Edwin.
    > >
    > > "Keith" wrote in message
    > > news:OUjHk2$hHHA.3412@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
    > >> Hello. We're looking at needing 20TB of storage for file sharing and
    > >> increasing this up to 100TB over the next 2 years. What NAS server
    > >> storage
    > >> would people recommend - i've looked at net app but they seem very
    > >> expensive.
    > >>
    > >> Thankyou.
    > >>

    > >
    > >

    >




  5. Re: Storage over 20TB

    Very helpful comments - thanks Edwin!

    "Edwin vMierlo [MVP]" wrote in
    message news:ODKTynKiHHA.3808@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
    > See, if you choose EMC NAS solution, you don't need a Windows Storage
    > Server, as it is already a NAS.
    > But that is not the question you should be asking.
    >
    > I am not in a position to give you a comparisson between 8 HP servers and
    > EMC NAS.
    > This because I am a bit EMC biassed, and because I have no HP server
    > experience with 100TB of data.
    > ( I do have very good experiences with EMC NAS solutions, with a lot of
    > data
    > on them )
    >
    > Again, it is not just "price tag" or "it has 100TB" you need to look at,
    > you
    > need to get your business requirements documented, then look at the
    > feature
    > set of HP servers, and EMC NAS.
    >
    > I don't think you should *just* look at *raw file storage/sharing* but
    > need
    > to look at *what else*
    > - backup / restore
    > - DR
    > - performance
    > - proven track record reliability / stability
    > - data cloning / snapping / replication
    > - scalability out/up (after your 2 year / 100TB... what then ?)
    > - hardware software life-cycle (e.g. do you need to replace
    > equipment/software after 3 years)
    > - .... and many more .... (such as your business requirements)
    >
    > Ask yourself what your businees needs first, then go out to suppliers, not
    > the other way around.
    > It seems to me that you already went to your suppliers with the "I need
    > 100TB, please quote" question, really ask yourself and your co-workes of
    > what is really needed. And let them build a solution which includes all
    > your
    > requirements.
    >
    > And I would not only talk to 2 suppliers, I would talk to 5/6 initially,
    > then make a short list of 2/3 talk to those again, then choose your
    > winner.
    >
    > Again, a 100TB is a lot of data, you want to make sure that YOU know what
    > all this data is, when it changes, where it goes, who uses it, and for
    > what,
    > how to backup, what are the users expectations of restore, what are the
    > business expectations of restore, SOX (ouch, dirty word)....
    >
    > If you just want to store lots of files, and hope for the best, then that
    > is
    > fine as well.
    > Go with what you think holds the data and is the cheapest.
    > This is not my advice, I would call this a recipe for dissaster.
    >
    > rgds,
    > Edwin.
    >
    >
    >
    > "Keith" wrote in message
    > news:%2366hYQBiHHA.3452@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
    >> Hi Edwin,
    >>
    >> Thanks. What would you thoughts be on this kind of storage with Windows
    >> Storage Server and DFS? Instead of 1 say EMC NAS which scales to 60TB we
    >> could look at around 8 HP DL320s servers with 8TB storage. EMC would
    >> argue
    >> reliability but the HP servers are pretty solid and costs would be around
    >> 1/8 of that for EMC.
    >>
    >> thanks.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> "Edwin vMierlo [MVP]" wrote in
    >> message news:ekArLEAiHHA.2368@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
    >> > Keith,
    >> >
    >> > I would start talking to *a lot* of storage vendors, like Net App :
    >> >
    >> > - Hitachi
    >> > - HP
    >> > - EMC
    >> >
    >> > and many others.... search google !
    >> >
    >> > But just to set your expectations, growing to 100TB is a lot of data,

    > not
    >> > sure what you call *expensive*, but 100TB is not going to be cheap.
    >> > Also, you might want to include DR / Backup-Restore solutions, as I am
    >> > sure
    >> > you don't have a 100TB backup capable solution laying around.
    >> >
    >> > Before talking to vendors, ensure you have your business requirements
    >> > (including how often does data change, what is important, what
    >> > back/restore
    >> > timings are needed, DR requirements, High Availability requirements,
    >> > performance requirements, data retention policies, # files, # users, #
    >> > sites, type of files, type of data, application details,... and so on

    > and
    >> > so
    >> > forth, this list is far from complete)
    >> >
    >> > After talking to a lot of vendors, make a XL sheet of capabilities and
    >> > compare to your original requirements.
    >> >
    >> > Good Luck with your project
    >> > Rgds,
    >> > Edwin.
    >> >
    >> > "Keith" wrote in message
    >> > news:OUjHk2$hHHA.3412@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
    >> >> Hello. We're looking at needing 20TB of storage for file sharing and
    >> >> increasing this up to 100TB over the next 2 years. What NAS server
    >> >> storage
    >> >> would people recommend - i've looked at net app but they seem very
    >> >> expensive.
    >> >>
    >> >> Thankyou.
    >> >>
    >> >
    >> >

    >>

    >
    >



+ Reply to Thread