Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1K views

    NetApp Vs EMC

    Uploaded by

    Vikram Singh
    The document compares the NetApp FAS and EMC Celerra storage systems. It finds that NetApp offers higher performance and lower TCO through features like FlexVol, RAID-DP, and efficient snapshots. EMC strengths include clustering and unified management, but it has weaknesses in performance, managing multiple operating systems, and limited SSD capabilities. The document recommends NetApp for highest performance, lowest TCO, simplest management, and high reliability.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    NetApp Vs EMC

    Uploaded by

    Vikram Singh
    1K views5 pages
    The document compares the NetApp FAS and EMC Celerra storage systems. It finds that NetApp offers higher performance and lower TCO through features like FlexVol, RAID-DP, and efficient snapshots. EMC strengths include clustering and unified management, but it has weaknesses in performance, managing multiple operating systems, and limited SSD capabilities. The document recommends NetApp for highest performance, lowest TCO, simplest management, and high reliability.

    Original Title

    NetApp vs EMC

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document compares the NetApp FAS and EMC Celerra storage systems. It finds that NetApp offers higher performance and lower TCO through features like FlexVol, RAID-DP, and efficient snapshots. EMC strengths include clustering and unified management, but it has weaknesses in performance, managing multiple operating systems, and limited SSD capabilities. The document recommends NetApp for highest performance, lowest TCO, simplest management, and high reliability.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    1K views5 pages

    NetApp Vs EMC

    Uploaded by

    Vikram Singh
    The document compares the NetApp FAS and EMC Celerra storage systems. It finds that NetApp offers higher performance and lower TCO through features like FlexVol, RAID-DP, and efficient snapshots. EMC strengths include clustering and unified management, but it has weaknesses in performance, managing multiple operating systems, and limited SSD capabilities. The document recommends NetApp for highest performance, lowest TCO, simplest management, and high reliability.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 5

    EMC Celerra NS Series Vs.

    Netapp FAS Series

    Spec Comparison
    Specifications NetApp FAS/V-Series EMC Celerra NS Series
    DART
    Operating
    Data ONTAP
    System (Data Access in Real
    Time)
    File System WAFL UxFS
    Simple
    Management & Yes Yes1[1]
    Installation
    High
    Performance Yes No2[2]
    RAID 6
    Snapshots in
    Yes Yes
    base system
    Rapid recovery
    SnapRestore SnapSure
    from Snapshots
    Flexible Volumes FlexVol Celerra AVM3[3]
    Integrated
    FlexClone No
    Cloning
    Workload
    FlexShare No
    Prioritization
    Virtualized
    MultiStore Virtual Data Movers
    Partitions
    Celerra Replicator /
    Mirroring SnapMirror
    MirrorView4[4]
    Max. systems in
    2 2-85[5]
    a cluster

    1[1] Celerra Unisphere delivers not all functionality

    2[2] EMC delivers RAID 6 but with performance penalties

    3[3] Without the ability to shrink volumes

    4[4] Celerra Replicator for NAS/iSCSI, MirrorView for FC/iSCSI

    5[5] NS-120 w/ 2 Data Mover, NS-480 up to 4, NS-960 up to 8. One Data Mover is passive for failover
    Competitive Alignment
    NetApp EMC
    FAS2040
    NS-120
    FAS2050
    FAS3140
    NS-480
    FAS3160
    FAS3170
    NS-960
    FAS60×0

    Feature Comparison
    Feature Notes
    Efficiency NetApp: High-performance RAID DP with
    industry leading space efficiency.

    EMC: Use of standard RAID 10 or 5 with


    performance and capacity limits.
    EMC Competitive Analysis

    Overview

     Recognized brand, large installed base


     >50% of sales are through channel and OEMs, including Dell and Fujitsu-Siemens
     40% revenue increase YoY

    Strengths

     N+1 clustering for high availability


     “All-in-one” NAS, iSCSI, and Fibre Channel connectivity
     File-level deduplication
     File-level retention (FLR), similar to SnapLock Enterprise
     Thin Provisioning with Automated Volume Manager
     Fully Automatic Storage Tiering (FAST) with FileMover Appliance for files
     Unified Management GUI with Celerra Unisphere
     Disk spin down

    Weaknesses

     At least two operating systems to manage


     DART on Celerra
     FLARE on CLARiiON
     RedHat Linux on Celerra Control Station
     No true Unified Storage
     Weak performance with Out-of-the-box install
     20% less performance with RAID-6 compared to RAID-5
     Highest Availability (5×9s) only for CLARiiON
     Async replication process for NAS with non-transparent failover
     Deduplication not supported on iSCSI and with VMware
     CLARiiON virtually provisioned LUNs are not supported and cannot be provisioned to
    Celerra
     Limited SSD drive capability (15 per NS-120/NS-480, 30 per NS-960)
     With FLR-C (Compliance) a CLARiiON admin can still delete the underlying LUN

    Why NetApp vs. EMC

     Highest performance in per-node throughput and overall response time


     Highly efficient snapshots
     FAS/V-Series exceeds NS performance as reported via third-party specSFS
    benchmark results
     Lower total cost of ownership
     IDC Storage Tracker reports NetApp NAS cost less than EMC NAS quarterly and
    YoY
     FlexVol and RAID-DP greatly increases utilization
     Simple upgrade path
     More cost-effective mirroring and disaster recovery
     Simplest to manage
     One management interface
     Less equipment to manage
     Less software to configure
     Highly reliable and available
     FAS/V-Series meets and exceeds Five 9’s availability validated by IDC report
     RAID-DP provides tolerance to multiple simultaneous disk failures without
    performance penalities commonly found in competitor RAID 6 deployments
     Choice of FAS/V-Series asynchorous, synchronous or semi-synchronous
    mirroring versus NS asynchronous approach for file replication
     Easily, quickly recover from errors and disasters
     No single point of failure vs EMC NS Control Station or active/active controller
    configurations
     NetApp Cloud, NDDC and ITaaS provides non-disruptive availability of business data
    and repeatable processes
     Muitlstore provides secure and transparent pools of storage, with Lifetime Key
    management with Decru
     Operations, Protection and Provisioing Managers provide seamless cloud-
    enabled automated provisioining and management
     SANScreen provides superior capacity management and chargeback
     Data Motion enables movement of storage pools non-disruptively

    Questions To Ask

    Storage Utilization

    · What level of thin provisioning does EMC NS provide?

    · How does EMC’s double parity RAID 6 perform?

    · How much capacity does EMC need for SnapClone?

    Disaster Recovery

    · Should I use SnapSure or SnapView?

    · How do you do backup and recovery from snapshots?

    Performance

    · Does Celerra do workload prioritization like FlexShare?

    · How many Snapshots can I take without any performance loss?

    Reliability & Availability


    · What level of availability can I expect from EMC NS and what third-party has validated
    this? Four 9’s? Five 9’s? Six 9’s?

    · How do you protect against a double disk failure while ensuring performance? Can you
    do it without mirroring the RAID groups?

    Archival and Compliance (if EMC proposes Celerra plus Centera)

    · Wouldn’t it make sense to include a CAS/compliance option on existing storage


    platforms (like NetApp does with SnapLock)?

    · How many dissimilar management interfaces and software are required?

    Enterprise-ready requirements

    · What is your strategy to support automatic disaster recovery?

    Support

    · How will you support my 24×7 production environment – go through partners that
    support other vendors?

    You might also like