存儲(chǔ)整合解決方案-資料下載頁
2025-07-18 21:12本頁面
【正文】 ce ? Storagebased Snapshot performance(VMFS amp。 RDM) – ZERO performance penalty on FAS2050 using snapshots with VMFS or RDM (Raw Device Mapping) – 43 72% performance degredation on EVA4100 under snapshots for VM’s on RDM (Raw Device Mapping) – 88 – 91% performance degredation on EVA4100 under snapshots for VM’s on VMFS 27 VeriTest Report: NetApp FAS vs. HP EVA Capacity Efficiency ? Resiliency and Capacity Utilization – 65% usable capacity on NetApp FAS2050 with RAIDDP – Compare to only 43% usable capacity on HP EVA4100 with Vraid1 – RAIDDP provides guaranteed protection from doubledisk failure without performance impact HP EVA4100 (VRAID1) 57% 43% NetApp FAS2050 (RAIDDP) 35% 65% 100% 10% 90% 0% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 28 VeriTest Report: NetApp FAS vs. HP EVA Other findings… ? The EVA4100 required 60% more time to configure, and deploy for VMware datacenter ? EVA SnapClone required 1TB of extra storage and over 1 hour to create a plete copy of the data ? EVA4100 FConly and requires addon products to support iSCSI and NFS ? NetApp’s native NFS provides significant advantages: Thin provisioning of VM’s by default Easy restore of individual VM’s from snapshots No LUNs to clone and present to ESX hosts Q/A Thank You !
語文相關(guān)推薦
鄂ICP備17016276號(hào)-1