Although system performance could be boosted significantly with a memory upgrade , ultimately environments without high-traffic such as home settings or small to mid-sized offices may benefit the most from a NAS system. A Storage Area Network SAN is a high-speed network of several interconnected devices operating as a data storage unit.
SAN connects directly to a server, computer or host through fiber channel technology and creates a separate network dedicated to data transfers. The creation of this additional network frees up LAN bandwidth and reduces latency issues. When a server accesses data on a SAN, the operating system OS recognizes it as a local hard drive, which also ensures quick processing speeds and data transfer. Since a SAN system is a cluster of devices working together, it offers a high level of redundancy.
There are always multiple devices to rely on if one malfunctions. SANs are also highly scalable, allowing more storage devices to be added over time without affecting network integrity.
This comes with a higher price point and level of complexity in setup and administration. SAN tends to be better suited for larger companies with massive data storage and processing needs. Mendy wrote Unix equivalent like FreeNAS or something similar.
Dell does this too for its servers, though. So you get that either way. There are a few things I'll disagree with here.
Most are around things like "most", the ideas behind it are solid. That's actually just reserved for a small percentage of top end SANs. Nimble, like you have, is a great example. If you want to get to that level, certainly you get those advantages.
But not most, by any stretch. Most SANs are either single controller or have dangerous dual controllers that are actually worse than having a single controller. A single server CAN do this. If we are comparing higher end approaches, like Nimble which takes us out of our categories being discussed here, then you can also toss in things like replicated SANs of all sorts and doing non-disruptive maintenance can be added that way, as well.
Once we are skinny cats in different ways, we get lots of options. A lot of what you pay for is the support. That's the biggest feature. Mendy This person is a verified professional. Great answers thanks guys! Windows makes great servers, but the iSCSI service is a weak point. This will give you an iSCSI setup that is one of the best you can get. And it's free, so no reason not to. Improve Article. Save Article. Like Article. Node ports 2.
Cables 3. Interconnect device such as: Hubs, switches, directors 4. Storage arrays 5. In this for backup and recovery, files are used instead of block by block copying technique. In SAN you get access directly to the storage as if it was your local hard drive. That makes the storage area network fast if configured correctly. The right SAN infrastructure consists of a dedicated network typically relying on a fiber-optics, enterprise-grade storage systems, and special connecting hardware.
The wrong SAN setup leads to network overload and instability. The management of the IT infrastructures with SAN requires knowledge of low-level block protocols and their hardware and software medium, such as FC switches, optical cables, SCSI-powered protocols, etc. SAN switch with optical Fibre Channel connector SAS can also be made faster by using the high-end devices, routing planning, using a dedicated network and overall optimizations.
Both storage solutions are often used within one organization. You may have a file server for storing user files and block storage for disaster recovery at the same time. Now you are aware of fundamental differences between SAN and NAS devices and can find your bearing on the storage technologies ground.
We have created a comparison chart with the key features of both storage types so you could choose the right one between SAN vs NAS.
0コメント