Hi Stephane,
Our config here is:
2 x Sun E35000, 2 CPU, 1GB Ram and eventually a NetApp 720, 200GB, 5x10/100.
We also had the option of putting disk on the Sun boxes, but went down the
NetApp
path for the following reasons:-
1) Price per GB was lower
2) Provided Raid 4, without the normal penalty in performance
3) Provided snapshot feature, VOBS are locked for only few minutes
4) Restores can come from the snapshots, then from tape
5) Removes the need for NFS Client in NT/UNIX interrop mode, CIFS used to
access Netapp
6) Netapp faster (IOops)
7) Faster startup
8) Easier administration
9) Centralised management of data
10) High availability
11) Used it before at another site
You might want to look at this paper 'An NFS File Server Appliance'
http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3001.html)
Cheers,
Sebastien.
----- Original Message -----
From: Stephane L Couillaud <scouillaud@com21.com>
To: <cciug@Rational.Com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2000 8:35 AM
Subject: [cciug] View Server: Netapp or not Netapp
>
> Just thought I'd bounce something I've been contemplating at lately.
>
> Currently, the group I just joined has views scattered across all our
> clients. I leave it up to your imagination on how much fun it can be to
> administrate some 400 views on something like a 100 clients. Anyway, to
> make a long story short I want to move all these views to a dedicated
> view server to make our life easier. That being the case I've been
> looking at the following two scenarios:
>
> Scenario 1:
>
> Buy a dedicated server (i.e. a Sun Enterprise 220R or 250 with 2GB of
> memory ) with an external storage array with at least 200 GB of disk
> space. RAID 5 is being considered.
>
> Scenario 2:
>
> Buy a server (i.e. Sun Enterprise 220R or 250 with 2GB of memory) plus a
> Netapp file server (i.e. F720) with 200 GB of disk space. I know
> there's a drawback where source pools are stored on the file server and
> the db's on the view server. RAID 5 is also being considered in this
> case.
>
> In your experience, which scenario would you recommend to support a
> group of roughly 50 developers? Would the servers mentioned in either
> scenarios do the trick or am I going overboard here? Any input would be
> greatly appreciated.
>
> -Steph
>
> --
>
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/
>
> Stephane L Couillaud Configuration Management Engineer
> COM21 Email: scouillaud@com21.com
> 750 Tasman Drive Phone: 408-544-1339
> Milpitas, CA 95035 Fax: 408-953-9299
> USA web: www.com21.com
>
>
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/
>
>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun May 06 2001 - 00:23:31 EDT