Network-attached storage. Network-attached storage (NAS) is file-level computer data storage connected to a computer network providing data access to a heterogeneous group of clients. NAS not only operates as a file server, but is specialized for this task either by its hardware, software, or configuration of those elements. NAS is often manufactured as a computer appliance – a specialized computer built from the ground up for storing and serving files – rather than simply a general purpose computer being used for the role.
[nb 1] As of 2010[update] NAS devices are gaining popularity, as a convenient method of sharing files among multiple computers.[1] Potential benefits of network-attached storage, compared to file servers, include faster data access, easier administration, and simple configuration.[2] Note that hard drives with "NAS" in their name are functionally the same as other drives. Description[edit] A Netgear NAS NAS vs. NAS vs. Visual differentiation of NAS vs. History[edit] Implementation[edit] Uses[edit] Linchi Shea : SAN vs. Disk Arrays: It goes a long way to be slightly more specific!
In the SQL Server communities, it's common to hear people talking about HP SAN, EMC SAN, 3Par SAN, and so on as if there were such things as HP SAN, EMC SAN, etc. Technically, SAN stands for Storage Area Network, but can be, and has been, used in two different ways. First, outside the storage communities, people often view everything beyond the drive at the OS level as the SAN with no regard to how that SAN is architected or configured as long as that drive is presented from some kind of SAN infrastructure.
Typically, this is the way SQL Server professionals talk about SAN. Within the storage communities, the interpretation is often different. I personally have tried consciously to stick to the second interpretation, and refrained from using terms such as HP SAN or EMC SAN, primarily because this type of speaking adds no value, but introduces inaccuracies, and can be potentially misleading. iSCSI SAN Storage VS Fibre Channel Array. iSCSI SAN Storage VS Fibre Channel Arrays When it comes to selecting a storage area network (SAN) for a small and medium-sized business (SMB) the question of iSCSI storage systems vs.
Fibre Channel (FC) arrays is sure to come up. Here are some differences to keep in mind when choosing a SAN for an SMB. Cost For the most part, an iSCSI storage system SAN is cheaper than a Fibre Channel array SAN. Reasons for this include the components, hard drives and networking technologies used in each type of SAN. Networking technology This may be obvious, but its worth mentioning: An iSCSI SAN uses a standard Ethernet network. Bandwidth differences Today most Fibre Channel array SANs support up to 4 GB of bandwidth, with talk of moving towards 8 GB. Performance differences For applications that demand high performance, your best bet is to choose a Fibre Channel SAN. Hard disk interfaces Overland StorageNexsan Technologies. SAN & NAS. Choosing the Right Technology Before you can decide if Storage Area Networks (SAN) or Network Attached Storage (NAS) is the right technology choice for your organization, it's helpful to compare the two of them.
With SAN or Block Based storage the typical connectivity is either via FC (Fibre Channel) or IP (ISCSI) protocol. With traditional NAS solutions the connectivity method is via IP and utilizes either CIFS (windows) or NFS (unix) protocol to have shared access to the data. Direct Attached Storage (DAS) Historically, the standard way of connecting hosts to storage devices has been direct, one-to-one SCSI attachments. As more and more storage and servers are added to meet demands, a DAS environment can cause a proliferation of server and storage islands. This creates a huge management burden for administrators, as well as inefficient utilization of resources. The Advantages of SAN over DAS The most effective SANs provide a wide range of benefits and advantages over DAS, including: