Feeds

EqualLogic doubles up its enterprise SAS

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

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk

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. ®

Security for virtualized datacentres

More from The Register

next story
Wanna keep your data for 1,000 YEARS? No? Hard luck, HDS wants you to anyway
Combine Blu-ray and M-DISC and you get this monster
US boffins demo 'twisted radio' mux
OAM takes wireless signals to 32 Gbps
Apple flops out 2FA for iCloud in bid to stop future nude selfie leaks
Millions of 4chan users howl with laughter as Cupertino slams stable door
No biggie: EMC's XtremIO firmware upgrade 'will wipe data'
But it'll have no impact and will be seamless, we're told
Students playing with impressive racks? Yes, it's cluster comp time
The most comprehensive coverage the world has ever seen. Ever
Run little spreadsheet, run! IBM's Watson is coming to gobble you up
Big Blue's big super's big appetite for big data in big clouds for big analytics
prev story

Whitepapers

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk
A single remote control platform for user support is be key to providing an efficient helpdesk. Retain full control over the way in which screen and keystroke data is transmitted.
WIN a very cool portable ZX Spectrum
Win a one-off portable Spectrum built by legendary hardware hacker Ben Heck
Saudi Petroleum chooses Tegile storage solution
A storage solution that addresses company growth and performance for business-critical applications of caseware archive and search along with other key operational systems.
Protecting users from Firesheep and other Sidejacking attacks with SSL
Discussing the vulnerabilities inherent in Wi-Fi networks, and how using TLS/SSL for your entire site will assure security.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.