[thelist] Share a drive across multiple webserver... NAS or SAN?
Jeff Wilhelm
thelist at summit7solutions.com
Wed Mar 2 09:37:49 CST 2005
You could do a fibre channel SAN, but then you'd need FC cards in the
servers.
We usually buy storage servers (we like SiliconMechanics for NAS boxes)
like:
http://www.siliconmechanics.com/c221/storage-server.php
and then just map drives. With dual gig-E ports the throughput is fine.
Or, we throw a couple of PowerVaults off the machines, like we did
yesterday. But bang for the buck SiliconMechanics is awesome.
Jeff
----Original Message----
From: thelist-bounces at lists.evolt.org
[mailto:thelist-bounces at lists.evolt.org] On Behalf Of
Joshua Olson Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 10:05 AM To:
thelist at lists.evolt.org Subject: [thelist] Share a drive
across multiple webserver... NAS or SAN?
> Hi listees,
>
> If I wanted to be able to share a drive across multiple
> servers and maximize the amount of throughput, would I
> want to install a NAS or a SAN?
>
> Until yesterday, I thought I wanted a SAN. Then, someone
> told me that only one web server can directly connect to
> the SAN (creating a LUN) and the other servers would then
> share the local drive... thusly piping all traffic
> through the controlling server. Therefore, a SAN is no
> better than a NAS in terms of concurrency. Is that
> correct?
>
> <><><><><><><><><><>
> Joshua Olson
> Web Application Engineer
> WAE Tech Inc.
> http://www.waetech.com/service_areas/
> 706.210.0168
More information about the thelist
mailing list