I am investigating the option of using a netapp filer (fas 250 or fas
270) as the storage system for our production system. The volumes
defined on the netapp filer will be accessed through iSCSI (SCSI over
IP) . The reseller we are talking to claims its the best storage system
for our database and I admit the specifications are impressive. So my
question is if there is anybody using it in a production environement?
To give you a hint about our environment. If you don't have clue what I
am talking about: www.netapp.com

Suse Enterprise Linux 8.1 DB2 v8.1 running on 2 processor opteron
machine with 16 GB of memory. The production database contains about 100
GB of data. An important note. We only use SMS tablespaces! (Please
don't go into the why's about this decission)

Thanks,

William.

William of Ockham wrote:

> I am investigating the option of using a netapp filer (fas 250 or fas
> 270) as the storage system for our production system. The volumes
> defined on the netapp filer will be accessed through iSCSI (SCSI over
> IP) . The reseller we are talking to claims its the best storage system
> for our database and I admit the specifications are impressive. So my
> question is if there is anybody using it in a production environement?
> To give you a hint about our environment. If you don't have clue what I
> am talking about: www.netapp.com

I have used Filers to support DB2, and was very surprised at the
performance that was possible (one environment was a 1Tb warehouse).

However, this was using the filer as a NAS (i.e. NFS mounting the
volumes on the server) -- not as direct attached storage (iSCSI
falls into this category, I believe). As a NAS, we had to pay
close attention to network design and NFS tuning on the server.

The filers are nice products -- I prefer them to EMC Clariion.






-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----