If NAS is so valuable, then why don't more people have NAS?

If NAS is so valuable, then why don't more people have NAS?

The fact is that there are relatively few NAS [network attached storage] vendors compared to SAN [storage area network] product vendors. There are dozens of vendors selling block-based storage but just a handful that sell NAS -- and there is only one NAS vendor out there that currently does over $1 billion in revenue. In short, the storage ecosystem today is much more SAN-oriented, so there isn't as much traction for NAS products yet. More users are adopting SANs because there are many more vendors selling it. I think that has a lot to do with it.

    Requires Free Membership to View

    When you register for SearchStorage.com, you’ll also receive targeted emails from my team of award-winning editorial writers. Our goal is to keep you informed on the hottest topics, the latest news and the biggest challenges you face as a storage professional today.

    Rich Castagna, Editorial Director

    By submitting your registration information to SearchStorage.com you agree to receive email communications from TechTarget and TechTarget partners. We encourage you to read our Privacy Policy which contains important disclosures about how we collect and use your registration and other information. If you reside outside of the United States, by submitting this registration information you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Your use of SearchStorage.com is governed by our Terms of Use. You may contact us at webmaster@TechTarget.com.

More NAS information
NAS tackles enterprise storage 

NAS Upgrades 

How to adapt NAS to your needs
Price is not the issue. In fact, NAS can actually be cheaper than SAN in many cases. Before iSCSI appeared in the storage mix, NAS was using Ethernet and LAN technologies where SAN required the additional infrastructure of Fibre Channel.

SANs do have the advantage of interoperability; SANs work in any environment and application. For example, Microsoft doesn't support Exchange on proprietary file systems, which is what NAS uses. So people aren't going to implement email, a fundamental enterprise application, on a NAS. As another example, you can run databases on NAS, but traditionally they are run on a SAN. NAS is 'smarter' with its file-level awareness, but that awareness also introduces some latency that limits NAS performance relative to a SAN. All this forces you to think a bit about where you should use NAS vs. SAN.

Check out the entire NAS FAQ guide.


This was first published in July 2007