Difference between Storage Area Network (SAN) and

Network Attached Storage (NAS)

Storage Area Network (SAN) is used for transferring the data between the servers
and the storage devices’ fiber channels and switches. In SAN (Storage Area Network),
data is identified by disk block. Protocols that are used in SAN are SCSI (Small
Computer System Interface), SATA (Serial Advanced Technology Attachment), etc.

Components of Storage Area Network (SAN):

1. Node ports
2. Cables
3. Interconnect devices such as Hubs, switches, directors
4. Storage arrays
5. SAN management Software

Network Attached Storage (NAS), data is identified by file name as well as byte
offset. In-Network Attached Storage, the file system is managed by Head units such as
CPU and Memory. In this for backup and recovery, files are used instead of the block-
by-block copying technique.

Components of Network Attached Storage (NAS):

1. Head unit: CPU, Memory

2. Network Interface Card (NIC)
3. Optimized operating system
4. Protocols
5. Storage protocols: ATA (Advanced Technology Attachment), SCSI, FC (Fibre
Channel)

The difference between Storage Area Network (SAN) and Network Attached Storage
(NAS) are as follows:

SAN NAS
SAN stands for Storage Area Network. NAS stands for Network Attached Storage.
In SAN (Storage Area Network), data is In NAS (Network Attached Storage), data
identified by disk block. is identified by file name as well as byte
offset.
In SAN (Storage Area Network), the file In NAS (Network Attached Storage), file
system is managed by servers. system is managed by Head unit.
SAN (Storage Area Network) is more NAS (Network Attached Storage) is less
costly. expensive than SAN.
SAN(Storage Area Network) is more NAS (Network Attached Storage) is less
complex than NAS. complex than SAN.
Protocols used in SAN are: SCSI, SATA, Protocols used in NAS are: File server,
etc. CIFS (Common Internet File System), etc.
For backups and recovery in SAN, Block For backups and recovery in NAS, Files are
by block copying technique is used. used.
SAN gives high performance in high- While NAS is not suitable for that
speedefforthigh-speed traffic systems. environment which has high speed traffic.
SAN needs more time and efforts in NAS is easy to manage and provides a
organizing and controlling. simple interface for organizing and
controlling.
SAN does not depends on the LAN and NAS needs TCP/IP networks and depends
uses a high-speedfiber channel on the LAN.
network.
Mostly used in enterprise environments. Applications include small-sized
organizations high-speed and homes.
It has lower latency. Compared to SAN, NAS has higher
latency.
SAN supports virtualization. NAS does not support virtualization.
The working of SAN is not affected by The working of NAS is affected by network
network traffic bottlenecks. traffic bottlenecks.

Global Brand :

Dear sir,for details information of Dell server please contact to our

dedicated person for this product.d
Shushanta Kumar 01958510788

Server Technical Support 01969633071 01973257906

01969633070 01969633073
kindly consult this numbers
NAS vs SAN Storage
NAS vs SAN doesn’t tell the whole story in comparing these two popular storage
architectures. NAS vs SAN are as complementary as they are competitive and fill
different needs and usage cases in the organization. Many larger organizations own
both.

However, enterprise IT budgets are not infinite, and organizations need to optimize
their storage expenditures to suit their priority requirements. This article will help
you do that by defining NAS vs SAN, calling out their distinctions, and presenting
usage cases for both architectures.

Both network-attached storage (NAS) and storage area network (SAN) were developed
to solve the problem of making stored data available to a lot of users at once. Each of
them provides dedicated storage for a group of users, but they couldn’t be more
different in their approach to achieving their mission.

A NAS is a single storage device that serves files over Ethernet and is relatively
inexpensive and easy to set up, while a SAN is a tightly coupled network of multiple
devices that work with block-based data and is more expensive and complex to set up
and manage. From a user perspective, the biggest difference between NAS vs SAN is
that NAS devices look like volumes on a file server and use protocols like NFS and
SMB/CIFS, while SAN-connected disks appear to the user as local drives.
(Network Attached Storage) NAS Defined:

A NAS is a computer connected to a network that provides file-based data storage

services to other devices on the network. The primary strength of NAS is how simple it
is to set up and deploy. NAS volumes appear to the user as network mounted volume.
The files to be served are typically contained on one or more storage drives, often
arranged into logical, redundant storage containers or RAID. The device itself is a
network node, much like computers and other TCP/IP devices, all of which maintain
their own IP address and can effectively communicate with other networked devices.
Although a NAS is usually not designed to be a general-purpose server, NAS vendors
and third parties are increasingly offering other software to provide server-like
functionality on a NAS.

NAS devices offer an easy way for multiple users in diverse locations to access data,
which is valuable when uses are collaborating on projects or sharing information. NAS
provides good access controls and security to support collaboration, while also
enabling someone who is not an IT professional to administer and manage access to
the data. It also offers good fundamental data security through the use of redundant
data structures — often RAID — and automatic backup services to local devices and to
the cloud.
  NAS is a file-level data storage device attached to an TCP/IP network, usually
Ethernet. It typically uses NFS or CIFS protocols, although other choices like HTTP are
available.
 NAS appears to the operating system as a shared folder. Employees access files from
the NAS like they do any other file on the network. NAS is LAN-dependent; if the LAN
goes down so does the NAS.
 NAS is not typically as fast as block-based SAN, but high-speed LANs can overcome
most performance and latency issues.

NAS Benefits:

 Relatively inexpensive
 24/7 and remote data availability
 Good expandability
 Redundant storage architecture
 Automatic backups to other devices and cloud
 Flexibility

NAS Limitations:

The weaknesses of a NAS are related to scale and performance. As more users need
access, the server might not be able to keep up and could require the addition of
more server horsepower. The other weakness is related to the nature of Ethernet
itself. By design, Ethernet transfers data from one place to another via packets,
dividing the source into a number of segments and sending them along to their
destination. Any of those packets could be delayed, or sent out of order, and might
not be available to the user until all of the packets arrive and are put back in order.

Any latency (slow or retried connections) is usually not noticed by users for small
files, but can be a major problem in demanding environments such as video
production, where files are extremely large and latency of more than a few
milliseconds can disrupt production steps such as rendering.
(Storage Area Network) SAN Defined:

SAN is a dedicated high-performance network for consolidated block-level storage.

The network interconnects storage devices, switches, and hosts. High-end enterprise
SANs may also include SAN directors for higher performance and efficient capacity
usage.

Servers connect to the SAN fabric using host bus adapters (HBAs). Servers identify the
SAN as locally attached storage, so multiple servers can share a storage pool. SANs are
not dependent on the LAN and relieves pressure on the local network by offloading
data directly from attached servers.

A SAN is a way to provide users shared access to consolidated, block level data
storage, even allowing multiple clients to access files at the same time with very high
performance. A SAN enhances the accessibility of storage devices such as disk arrays
and tape libraries by making them appear to users as if they were external hard drives
on their local system. By providing a separate storage-based network for block data
access over high-speed Fibre Channel, and avoiding the limitations of TCP/IP
protocols and local area network congestion, a SAN provides the highest access speed
available for media and mission critical stored data.

Because it’s considerably more complex and expensive than NAS, SAN is typically used
by large corporations and requires administration by an IT staff. For some
applications, such as video editing, it’s especially desirable due to its high speed and
low latency. Video editing requires fair and prioritized bandwidth usage across the
network, which is an advantage of SAN.

A primary strength of a SAN is that all of the file access negotiation happens over
Ethernet while the files are served via extremely high speed Fibre Channel, which
translates to very snappy performance on the client workstations, even for very large
files. For this reason SAN is widely used today in collaborative video editing
environments.

SAN Benefits:

 Extremely fast data access

 Dedicated network for storage relieves stress on LAN
 Highly expandable
 OS level (block level) access to files
 High quality-of-service for demanding applications such as video editing

SAN Limitations:

The challenge of SAN can be summed up in its cost and administration requirements —
having to dedicate and maintain both a separate Ethernet network for metadata file
requests and implement a Fibre Channel network can be a considerable investment.
That being said, SANs are really the only way to provide very fast data access for a
large number of users that also can scale to supporting hundreds of users at the same
time.

SAN vs NAS Storage

NAS SAN
Typically used in homes and small to Typically used in professional and enterprise
medium sized businesses. environments.
Less expensive More expensive
Easier to manage Requires more administration
Data accessed as if it were a network- Servers access data as if it were a local hard
attached drive (files) drive (blocks)
Speed dependent on local TCP/IP usually High speed using Fibre Channel, 2 gigabits to
Ethernet network, typically 100 megabits to 128 gigabits per second. Some SANs use iSCSI
one gigabit per second. Generally slower as a less expensive but slower alternative to
 throughput and higher latency due to slower Fibre Channel.
file system layer.
I/O protocols: NFS, SMB/CIFS, HTTP SCSI, iSCSI, FCoE
Lower-end not highly scalable; high-end NAS Network architecture enables admins to
scale to petabytes using clusters or scale-out scale both performance and capacity as
nodes needed
Does not work with virtualization Works with virtualization
Requires no architectural changes Requires architectural changes
Entry level systems often have a single point Fault tolerant network with redundant
of failure, e.g. power supply functionality
Susceptible to network bottlenecks Not affected by network traffic bottlenecks.
Simultaneous access to cache, benefiting
applications such as video editing.
File backups and snapshots economical and Block backups and mirrors require more
schedulable. storage.

Differences Between SAN and NAS:

1) Fabric. NAS uses TCP/IP networks, most commonly Ethernet. Traditional SANs
typically run on high speed Fibre Channel networks, although more SANs are adopting
IP-based fabric because of FC’s expense and complexity. High performance remains a
SAN requirement and flash-based fabric protocols are helping to close the gap
between FC speeds and slower IP.

2) Data processing. The two storage architectures process data differently: NAS
processes file-based data and SAN processes block data. The story is not quite as
straightforward as that of course: NAS may operate with a global namespace, and
SANs have access to a specialized SAN file system. A global namespace aggregates
multiple NAS file systems to present a consolidated view. SAN file systems enable
servers to share files. Within the SAN architecture, each server maintains a
dedicated, non-shared LUN. SAN file systems allow servers to safely share data by
providing file-level access to servers on the same LUN.

3) Protocols. NAS connects directly to an Ethernet network via a cable into

an Ethernet switch. NAS can use several protocols to connect with servers including
NFS, SMB/CIFS, and HTTP. On the SAN side, servers communicate with SAN disk drive
devices using the SCSI protocol. The network is formed using SAS/SATA fabrics, or
mapping layers to other protocols such as Fibre Channel Protocol (FCP) that maps SCSI
over Fibre Channel, or iSCSI that maps SCSI over TCP/IP.

4) Performance. SANs are the higher performers for environments that need high-
speed traffic such as high transaction databases and ecommerce websites. NAS
generally has lower throughput and higher latency because of its slower file system
layer, but high-speed networks can make up for performance losses within NAS.
5) Scalability. Entry level and NAS devices are not highly scalable, but high-end NAS
systems scale to petabytes using clusters or scale-out nodes. In contrast, scalability is
a major driver for purchasing a SAN. Its network architecture enables admins to scale
performance and capacity in scale-up or scale-out configurations.

6) Price. Although a high-end NAS will cost more than an entry-level SAN, in general
NAS is less expensive to purchase and maintain. NAS devices are considered
appliances and have fewer hardware and software management components than a
storage area network. Administrative costs also figure into the equation. SANs are
more complex to manage with FC SANs on top of the complexity heap. A rule of
thumb is to figure 10 to 20 times the purchase cost as an annual maintenance
calculation.

7) Ease of management. In a one-to-one comparison, NAS wins the ease of

management contest. The device easily plugs into the LAN and offers a simplified
management interface. SANs require more administration time than the NAS device.
Deployment often requires making physical changes to the data center, and ongoing
management typically requires specialized admins. The exception to the SAN-is-
harder argument is multiple NAS devices that do not share a common management
console.

NAS and SAN Use Cases:

NAS and SAN serve different needs and use cases. Understand what you need and
where you need it.

NAS: When you need to consolidate, centralize, and share.

· File storage and sharing. This is NAS major use case in mid-sized, SMB, and
enterprise remote offices. A single NAS device allows IT to consolidate multiple file
servers for simplicity, ease of management, and space and energy savings.

· Active archives. Long-term archives are best stored on less expensive storage like
tape or cloud-based cold storage. NAS is a good choice for searchable and accessible
active archives, and high capacity NAS can replace large tape libraries for archives.

· Big data. Businesses have several choices for big data: scale-out NAS, distributed
JBOD nodes, all-flash arrays, and object-based storage. Scale-out NAS is good for
processing large files, ETL (extract, transform, load), intelligent data services like
automated tiering, and analytics. NAS is also a good choice for large unstructured
data such as video surveillance and streaming, and post-production storage.

· Virtualization. Not everyone is sold on using NAS for virtualization networks, but the
usage case is growing and VMware and Hyper-V both support their datastores on NAS.
This is a popular choice for new or small virtualization environments when the
business does not already own a SAN.
· Virtual desktop interface (VDI). Mid-range and high-end NAS systems offer native
data management features that support VDIsuch as fast desktop cloning and data
deduplication.

SAN: When you need to accelerate, scale, and protect.

· Databases and ecommerce websites. General file serving or NAS will do for smaller
databases, but high-speed transactional environments need the SAN’s high I/O
processing speeds and very low latency. This makes SANs a good fit for enterprise
databases and high traffic ecommerce websites.

· Fast backup. Server operating systems view the SAN as attached storage, which
enables fast backup to the SAN. Backup traffic does not travel over the LAN since the
server is backing up directly to the SAN. This makes for faster backup without
increasing the load on the Ethernet network.

· Virtualization. NAS supports virtualized environments, but SANs are better suited
to large-scale and/or high-performance deployments. The storage area network
quickly transfers multiple I/O streams between VMs and the virtualization host, and
high scalability enables dynamic processing.

· Video editing. Video editing applications need very low latency and very high data
transfer rates. SANs provide this high performance because it cables directly to the
video editing desktop client, dispensing with an extra server layer. Video editing
environments need a third-party SAN distributed file system and per-node load
balancing control.

NAS vs SAN Convergence:

The benefits of SAN are motivating some vendors to offer SAN-like products at lower
cost chiefly by avoiding the high expense of Fibre Channel networking. This has
resulted in a partial convergence of NAS vs SAN approaches to network storage at a
lower cost than purely SAN.

One example is Fibre Channel over Ethernet (FCoE), which supports block level
transfers over standard LAN at speeds of 10GB/sec+. For smaller deployments, iSCSI is
even less expensive, allowing SCSI commands to be sent inside of IP packets on a LAN.
Both of these approaches avoid expensive Fibre Channel completely, resulting in
slower, but less expensive ways to get the block level access and other benefits of a
SAN.

Unified (or multi-protocol) SAN/NAS combines file and block storage into a single
storage system. These unified systems support up to four protocols. The storage
controllers allocate physical storage for NAS vs SAN processing.
They are popular for mid-range enterprises who need both SAN and NAS, but lack data
center space and specialized admins for separate systems. Converged SAN/NAS are a
much smaller part of the market than distinct deployments but show steady growth.