Feeds

EqualLogic doubles up its enterprise SAS

4.8TB in one array - but are these drives getting too big?

Boost IT visibility and business value

IP-based storage is thoroughly enterprise-ready, claimed iSCSI specialist EqualLogic as it doubled the capacity of its high-end SAS (Serial Attached SCSI) storage box with almost no change in price.

The new PS3900XV array uses Seagate 300GB SAS drives to provide 4.8TB of capacity for around £40,000 - just £1,000 more than the 2.3TB version, said EqualLogic marketing veep John Joseph. He added that the latter's price will now be cut to £30,000. Bad news if you bought one recently...

EqualLogic is one of the few pushing iSCSI as equal-to or better-than Fibre Channel for high-performance large enterprise SANs. Joseph claims it can beat Fibre Channel partly because it virtualises and tiers the storage inside the array, and partly because it uses 15,000rpm SAS.

"Eighty per cent of SAS today ships inside servers, very few are using it in SAN technology," he said. Serial ATA is being used in SANs, he added, but for volume storage where reliability and performance are less of an issue. By comparison, the SAS drives his arrays use have a five year warranty and a 1.4 million hour MTBF.

It has been said that there's only two good times to buy a PC - six months ago, and six months from now - and the same seems to be true of storage. The cloud on the horizon is that putting more and more data onto each drive is eventually going to create a performance bottleneck, when the I/O rate demanded of it exceeds its read/write capability.

Joseph acknowledged that this point is not too far off, but said remedies are already in the works - in particular, a shift to enterprise-class 2.5 inch SAS drives.

"In 3.5 inch disks we have reached capacity levels where customers say 'I want more actuators' [read/write mechanisms]. So there is a trend towards 2.5 inch technology, with more actuators chasing the data," he said.

The smaller drives can provide half the capacity in a quarter of the footprint, although power and heat issues will probably restrict array builders to replacing 16 3.5 inch drives with just 24 to 30 2.5 inch models, he added.

"There is a price penalty too, that's why we're not racing to that technology," he said. Not only does a hard drive cost much the same to build whatever its physical size, but the smaller drives cost extra to miniaturise as well. ®

Boost IT visibility and business value

More from The Register

next story
HP busts out new ProLiant Gen9 servers
Think those are cool? Wait till you get a load of our racks
Shoot-em-up: Sony Online Entertainment hit by 'large scale DDoS attack'
Games disrupted as firm struggles to control network
Community chest: Storage firms need to pay open-source debts
Samba implementation? Time to get some devs on the job
Like condoms, data now comes in big and HUGE sizes
Linux Foundation lights a fire under storage devs with new conference
Silicon Valley jolted by magnitude 6.1 quake – its biggest in 25 years
Did the earth move for you at VMworld – oh, OK. It just did. A lot
Gamma's not a goner! UK ISP sorts out major outage
Says BT is the root of the problem
prev story

Whitepapers

Gartner critical capabilities for enterprise endpoint backup
Learn why inSync received the highest overall rating from Druva and is the top choice for the mobile workforce.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Rethinking backup and recovery in the modern data center
Combining intelligence, operational analytics, and automation to enable efficient, data-driven IT organizations using the HP ABR approach.
Consolidation: The Foundation for IT Business Transformation
In this whitepaper learn how effective consolidation of IT and business resources can enable multiple, meaningful business benefits.
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.