Unsolved
This post is more than 5 years old
256 Posts
0
1481
February 24th, 2012 13:00
New Storage Quality Award Survey Shows EMC Beats NetApp
I actually have access to the PDF of the full-blown Storage Magazine NAS Storage Quality Award survey, which unfortunately I cannot post here for copyright reasons. However, I can tell you we outperforomed NetApp significantly. Here are the overall results:
As you can see, we have fallen from our previous first place to second place. Impressive considering that this is a NAS award, not our usual strength. However the bad news is that Oracle has overtaken us (slightly) with their ZFS appliance.
Any thoughts or comments on this would be welcome.
No Events found!
jweinshe
40 Posts
0
February 27th, 2012 11:00
I'd swear I read this same survey last year and it had Oracle as the lowest or almost the lowest in most cateogies. Unfortunately, I'm having a hard time finding it.
Any chance you might know where to find it?
If my memory is correct (and honestly, as I get older that becomes less than a certainty), I find it suspicious that Oracle (or anyone for that matter) could go from so low to so high in one year.
NickPOW1
94 Posts
1
February 27th, 2012 11:00
Jay;
I read a similar article where NetApp finished 1st, Hitachi 2nd and EMC and IBM tied for 3rd. Oracle was not listed. The article was published on Storage Magazine’s April 2011 issue. It is a survey and highly subjective.
http://searchstoragechannel.techtarget.com/survey/NetApp-wins-6th-enterprise-storage-systems-Quality-Awards-survey
In Storage magazine’s January 2012 issue on Quality awards for NAS Storage it is Oracle, EMC, Dell, NetApp and HP.
http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/storage/nas/storage-quality-awards-jan12-1521728.pdf
Nick
jweinshe
40 Posts
0
February 27th, 2012 11:00
Thanks Nick
Interesting, but not the one I was looking for. I was originally given a copy of it by a Dell Compellent sales group when they were trying to switch one of my clients to Dell (from EMC! Don't worry, didn't happen) and I remember Oracle was very prominently listed because the client brought it up when Oracle hardware came calling a month or two later. It was... unpleasant to be in that meeting.
Anyhow, hopefully I can find it again - if my memory isn't completely off.
SKT2
2 Intern
•
1.3K Posts
0
June 28th, 2012 19:00
I recently had a performance test wit ZFS 7420 and was impressive with the numbers i see (~10K IOPS with less than 1ms)
BartS
46 Posts
0
June 29th, 2012 02:00
Can you show us more detail? How big was the dataset that you tested against?
i.e. was it much bigger than the storage cache, did you test a mix of reads/writes/sequential/random ?
What was the storage configuration (i.e. how many drives of what type, etc).
It's easy to get high iops given small datasets but real-world apps are large and unpredictable in terms of workload.
BTW.. given that a single Flash drive can easily do 3000+ random read iops, a ZFS pool constructed out of a few of these would give you 10K iops @ 1ms. Now try that on a 10TB dataset with 5% flash and 95% spinning rust...