Historically, we are Unix mirrored to multiple storage subsystems to provide continuous availability in the event of a storage subsystem failure. Is it reasonable to think this is not needed, on which platforms? In particular, what about Clariion?
You are doing the right thing. All storage subsystems have single points of failure, including Clariion boxes. Consider the power source, the cache boards, internal controllers. Also consider the box itself. If a large cup of a sticky-sweet beverage were to be poured into a Clariion, it would almost certainly fail. I have never seen any single-box solution that did not have single points of failure. By mirroring to another subsystem, you are protecting yourself against the failure of a single subsystem.
Evan L. Marcus
Editor's note: Do you agree with this expert's response? If you have more to share, post it in our .HcX6azlxeJg^[email protected]!viewtype=&skip=&expand=>Administrator Central discussion forum.
Dig Deeper on SAN technology and arrays
Related Q&A from Evan Marcus
Storage expert Evan Marcus compares software and hardware RAID and outlines the benefits and drawbacks of each. Continue Reading
Can I install an operating system (OS) and put data in different partitions of RAID-5, or is RAID-1 (hardware-based RAID) a better solution? Is it ok... Continue Reading
Storage expert Evan Marcus offers an answer to the question: "Is hot-hot replication possible with EMC's SRDF?" Continue Reading