Dale Ghent wrote:
Yeah sure it "might" eat into STK profits, but one will still have to
go there for redundant controllers.
Repeat after me: There is no STK. There is only Sun. 8-)
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://m
btw, I liked your blog entry about Lun Masking
http://elektronkind.org/
selim.
On 1/31/07, Dale Ghent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 31, 2007, at 4:26 AM, Selim Daoud wrote:
> you can still do some lun masking at the HBA level (Solaris 10)
> this feature is call "blacklist"
Oh, I'd do that
On Jan 31, 2007, at 4:26 AM, Selim Daoud wrote:
you can still do some lun masking at the HBA level (Solaris 10)
this feature is call "blacklist"
Oh, I'd do that but Solaris isn't the only OS that uses arrays on my
SAN, and other hosts even cross-departmental. Thus masking from the
array is
you can still do some lun masking at the HBA level (Solaris 10)
this feature is call "blacklist"
On 1/31/07, Dale Ghent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 24, 2007, at 1:19 PM, Frank Cusack wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 09:46:11AM -0800, Moazam Raja wrote:
>>
>> Note that the 3511 is being r
On Jan 24, 2007, at 1:19 PM, Frank Cusack wrote:
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 09:46:11AM -0800, Moazam Raja wrote:
Note that the 3511 is being replaced with the 6140:
Which is MUCH nicer but also much pricier. Also, no non-RAID option.
The 6140 is nicer in terms of performance.
However if you
On Jan 25, 2007, at 17:30, Albert Chin wrote:
On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 02:24:47PM -0600, Al Hopper wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jan 2007, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 10:16 -0500, Torrey McMahon wrote:
So there's no way to treat a 6140 as JBOD? If you wanted to use
a 6140
with ZFS, an
On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 02:24:47PM -0600, Al Hopper wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2007, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 10:16 -0500, Torrey McMahon wrote:
> >
> > > > So there's no way to treat a 6140 as JBOD? If you wanted to use a 6140
> > > > with ZFS, and really wanted JBOD, your
Hello Jonathan,
Thursday, January 25, 2007, 9:03:47 PM, you wrote:
JE> On Jan 25, 2007, at 14:34, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
>> On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 10:16 -0500, Torrey McMahon wrote:
>>
So there's no way to treat a 6140 as JBOD? If you wanted to use a
6140
with ZFS, and really wan
On Thu, 25 Jan 2007, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 10:16 -0500, Torrey McMahon wrote:
>
> > > So there's no way to treat a 6140 as JBOD? If you wanted to use a 6140
> > > with ZFS, and really wanted JBOD, your only choice would be a RAID 0
> > > config on the 6140?
> >
> > Why wou
On Jan 25, 2007, at 14:34, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 10:16 -0500, Torrey McMahon wrote:
So there's no way to treat a 6140 as JBOD? If you wanted to use a
6140
with ZFS, and really wanted JBOD, your only choice would be a RAID 0
config on the 6140?
Why would you want to
On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 10:16 -0500, Torrey McMahon wrote:
> > So there's no way to treat a 6140 as JBOD? If you wanted to use a 6140
> > with ZFS, and really wanted JBOD, your only choice would be a RAID 0
> > config on the 6140?
>
> Why would you want to treat a 6140 like a JBOD? (See the previou
On January 25, 2007 11:22:41 AM -0500 Jonathan Edwards
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 25, 2007, at 10:16, Torrey McMahon wrote:
Albert Chin wrote:
So there's no way to treat a 6140 as JBOD? If you wanted to use a
6140
with ZFS, and really wanted JBOD, your only choice would be a RAID 0
con
On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 10:16:47AM -0500, Torrey McMahon wrote:
> Albert Chin wrote:
> >On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 10:19:29AM -0800, Frank Cusack wrote:
> >
> >>On January 24, 2007 10:04:04 AM -0800 Bryan Cantrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 09:46:11AM -0800
On Jan 25, 2007, at 10:16, Torrey McMahon wrote:
Albert Chin wrote:
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 10:19:29AM -0800, Frank Cusack wrote:
On January 24, 2007 10:04:04 AM -0800 Bryan Cantrill
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 09:46:11AM -0800, Moazam Raja wrote:
Well, he did sa
Albert Chin wrote:
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 10:19:29AM -0800, Frank Cusack wrote:
On January 24, 2007 10:04:04 AM -0800 Bryan Cantrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 09:46:11AM -0800, Moazam Raja wrote:
Well, he did say fairly cheap. the ST 3511 is about $18.5
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 10:19:29AM -0800, Frank Cusack wrote:
> On January 24, 2007 10:04:04 AM -0800 Bryan Cantrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 09:46:11AM -0800, Moazam Raja wrote:
> >>Well, he did say fairly cheap. the ST 3511 is about $18.5k. That's
> >>about the
Ben Gollmer wrote:
> On Jan 24, 2007, at 12:37 PM, Shannon Roddy wrote:
>
>> I went with a third party FC/SATA unit which has been flawless as
>> a direct attach for my ZFS JBOD system. Paid about $0.70/GB.
>
> What did you use, if you don't mind my asking?
>
Arena Janus 6641. Turns out I und
On Jan 24, 2007, at 12:37 PM, Shannon Roddy wrote:
I went with a third party FC/SATA unit which has been flawless as
a direct attach for my ZFS JBOD system. Paid about $0.70/GB.
What did you use, if you don't mind my asking?
--
Ben
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007, Shannon Roddy wrote:
> Sun is missing out on lots of lower end storage, but perhaps that is by
> design. I am a small shop by many standards, but I would have spent
> tens of thousands over the last few years with Sun if they had
> reasonably priced storage.I just need a
Frank Cusack wrote:
> On January 24, 2007 9:40:41 AM -0800 Richard Elling
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Peter Eriksson wrote:
>>> Yes please. Now give me a fairly cheap (but still quality) FC-attached
>>> JBOD utilizing SATA/SAS disks and I'll be really happy! :-)
>>
>> ... with write cache and
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 01:25:26PM -0500, Angelo Rajadurai wrote:
> If your company can qualify as a start-up (4 year old or less with less
> than 150 employees) you may want to look at the Sun Startup essentials
> program. It provides Sun hardware at big discounts for startups.
>
> http://www.sun
'Cept the 3511 is highway robbery for what you get. ;-)
Best Regards,
Jason
On 1/24/07, Richard Elling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Peter Eriksson wrote:
>> too much of our future roadmap, suffice it to say that one should expect
>> much, much more from Sun in this vein: innovative software and i
On 24 Jan 2007, at 13:04, Bryan Cantrill wrote:
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 09:46:11AM -0800, Moazam Raja wrote:
Well, he did say fairly cheap. the ST 3511 is about $18.5k. That's
about the same price for the low-end NetApp FAS250 unit.
Note that the 3511 is being replaced with the 6140:
htt
On January 24, 2007 10:02:52 AM -0800 Rich Teer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Dunno about FC or iSCSI, but what I'd really like to see is a 1U direct
attach 8-drive SAS JBOD, as described (back in May 2006!) here:
http://richteer.blogspot.com/2006/05/sun-storage-product-i-would-like-to.h
On January 24, 2007 9:40:41 AM -0800 Richard Elling
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Peter Eriksson wrote:
Yes please. Now give me a fairly cheap (but still quality) FC-attached
JBOD utilizing SATA/SAS disks and I'll be really happy! :-)
... with write cache and dual redundant controllers? I think
On 1/24/07, Jonathan Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 24, 2007, at 09:25, Peter Eriksson wrote:
>> too much of our future roadmap, suffice it to say that one should
>> expect
>> much, much more from Sun in this vein: innovative software and
>> innovative
>> hardware working together to
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007, Jonathan Edwards wrote:
> > Yes please. Now give me a fairly cheap (but still quality) FC-attached JBOD
> > utilizing SATA/SAS disks and I'll be really happy! :-)
>
> Could you outline why FC attached instead of network attached (iSCSI say)
> makes more sense to you? It migh
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 09:46:11AM -0800, Moazam Raja wrote:
> Well, he did say fairly cheap. the ST 3511 is about $18.5k. That's
> about the same price for the low-end NetApp FAS250 unit.
Note that the 3511 is being replaced with the 6140:
http://www.sun.com/storagetek/disk_systems/midrange
Well, he did say fairly cheap. the ST 3511 is about $18.5k. That's
about the same price for the low-end NetApp FAS250 unit.
-Moazam
On Jan 24, 2007, at 9:40 AM, Richard Elling wrote:
Peter Eriksson wrote:
too much of our future roadmap, suffice it to say that one should
expect
much, much m
Peter Eriksson wrote:
too much of our future roadmap, suffice it to say that one should expect
much, much more from Sun in this vein: innovative software and innovative
hardware working together to deliver world-beating systems with undeniable
economics.
Yes please. Now give me a fairly cheap (
I think this will be a hard sell internally given that it would eat up their
own storagetek line.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discu
On Jan 24, 2007, at 09:25, Peter Eriksson wrote:
too much of our future roadmap, suffice it to say that one should
expect
much, much more from Sun in this vein: innovative software and
innovative
hardware working together to deliver world-beating systems with
undeniable
economics.
Yes p
> too much of our future roadmap, suffice it to say that one should expect
> much, much more from Sun in this vein: innovative software and innovative
> hardware working together to deliver world-beating systems with undeniable
> economics.
Yes please. Now give me a fairly cheap (but still quality
33 matches
Mail list logo
