Re: NetAps vs EMC

[Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be>]

At 10:58 AM -0700 2001/1/30, Yves Dorfsman wrote:

>  Does anybody have any hard number on the reliability of NetAps vs EMC ?
>
>  Anybody's been running NetAps filer for a long time, could you comment on
>  their reliability ?

	My problem with NetApp has always been that the management 
interface was very minimal, and only one person can log in at a time. 
If someone logs on and then shuts down their terminal program without 
logging out, no one else can log in until the box is rebooted.

	Yes, there's the web interface, but in my experience, that's not 
really suitable for administration, just monitoring.


	One of the reasons I always liked Auspex was that they had a 
"host controller" that was a real Unix box (SunOS 4.1.x, as I 
recall), and you could do real Unix things on them.  If the host died 
or was being rebooted, you couldn't get any locks and you couldn't 
mount any new filesystems, but because of the way they implemented 
"functional multiprocessing" (i.e., dedicated hardware to handle most 
typical NFS operations), reads and writes of existing filesystems 
could continue unhindered.

	I don't know if this is possible with EMC, but I have to believe 
that their management interface is more full-featured than NetApp.

--
   These are my opinions -- not to be taken as official Skynet policy
======================================================================
Brad Knowles, <brad.knowles@skynet.be>