Very good question and one that comes up a lot when folks are trying to figure out their SAN strategy from both...
By submitting your email address, you agree to receive emails regarding relevant topic offers from TechTarget and its partners. You can withdraw your consent at any time. Contact TechTarget at 275 Grove Street, Newton, MA.
a manageability and cost perspective.
There was a recent survey done by the CIO council in Washington, DC that touched on this subject. The outcome of the survey showed that there were three different buying methods used by the major corporations implementing SANs.
The first approach was to use "competing islands" managed by a single enterprise storage group created within the corporation. This method avoided vendor "lock-in" and kept costs competitive by having the two primary storage vendors compete for each new initiative.
The second method used "competing SSPs", where the company outsourced its storage requirements to the SSP community and let the SSPs choose the storage vendor. The SSP would then provide the customer with either on-site or off-site managed storage on a cost per gigabyte basis, with an associated up-time SLA.
The third method was to use a B2B method of purchasing "spot market storage" by trading B2B services with excess capacity owned by the SSP marketplace. This allowed buying "flexibility while allowing the customer to avoid long-term SSP contract lock-in."
Of course, these approaches were used by major corporations doing millions of dollars worth of storage purchases each year. For a smaller shop implementing a SAN for a single data center, a single vendor sometimes makes sense to get that "one throat to choke" feeling. It also makes the implementation and management easier since everything is pre-certified by the single vendor. I usually see a "tiered" model at most sites where there may be a cheaper modular solution for non-critical applications like file/print and another higher-end solution for mission-critical database type applications. This will allow your storage group to "charge-back" storage requirements to business functions based on a performance and availability SLA.
Editor's note: Do you agree with this expert's response? If you have more to share, post it in one of our .bphAaR2qhqA^0@/searchstorage>discussion forums.
Related Q&A from Christopher Poelker
RAID can allow for better storage performance and higher availability, and there are many different RAID types. Read a comparison of RAID levels, as ...continue reading
SAN expert Chris Poelker discusses how to change the size of a LUN in a Microsoft cluster server environment.continue reading
SAN expert Chris Poelker compares connecting a SAN with wavelength cabling and dark fiber and discusses the pros and cons of each.continue reading
Have a question for an expert?
Please add a title for your question
Get answers from a TechTarget expert on whatever's puzzling you.