Recommended NAS/SAN for ESXI usage

[WnDTech.Tips]

Hi, i'm looking at a replacement SAN for our esxi hosts, we have about 20 vm's running between 2 hosts, currently using a 4Gb link direct to the SAN, however..

 

our SAN is due to be replaced and repurposed and i'm looking at upgrading to 10Gb Ethernet direct to the hosts with at least 36TB of Storage with possibility to expand if needed. 

i've had some quotes back for just over 10k in GBP, and would like to see if i can do better, i'm not mega familiar with what sans are out there and which ones to avoid, so i'm really looking for recommendations, it must have ideally quad 10gb ethernet, at least 2U, but can be larger if needed doesn't matter. reliable and robust for 24/7 running, obviously the configuration of the actual array will be decided one we know storage capacity and amount of drives.

 

this is for a educational environment not for myself, so it MUST be reliable.

Cheers guys !

[Windows7ge]

@leadeater may have some helpful insight. Definitely more than myself.

 

Though I can comment on your desire for quad 10Gbit. If the previous configuration was only an link-aggregated 4Gbit do you really feed going 10x that is necessary? 1x10Gbit would already be 2.5x the bandwidth. 5x for 20Gbit. Unless you have multiple clients making massive file transfers (not too likely in a school) then I can't see going over 20Gbit worth it and that could save you a few $100 dollars. Maybe a $1000 depending on what 10Gbit quad NIC you really need for a professional reliable operation.

[leadeater]

Previous job we used to deploy IBM/Lenovo V3700 storage arrays for schools, along with vSphere Essential Plus. Easy to manage systems and expandable, most of them used direct connect SAS however you are restricted to 3 hosts if you pick that controller type but Essentials Plus is also licensed at 3 dual socket servers. You can use 10Gb iSCSI as well, along with FC, but I don't see much point going with either in such a small setup that won't be switched as SAS connect is much faster (12Gb x4 per port).

 

You have plenty of other options too though, Netapp E-Series (E2800) is basically the same thing as the IBM V3700 as they are both based off LSI OEM which a lot of systems are anyway. Slightly more expensive but more feature rich is the Netapp FAS series (FAS2700), you can host SMB/NFS shares directly off this (AD integrated) rather than create file server VMs.

 

Dell EMC will have many options that will fit your needs though I'm not as familiar with their lineups and where they are priced.

 

HPE 3PAR is another one to look at and very well priced last I looked at them.

 

For the most part all the storage systems in the entry level are exactly the same, feature wise or even literally same OEM. Just contact a sales rep from Lenovo/Netapp/Dell/HPE and give them your requirements and they'll spec out a system that should suit what you need.

[WnDTech.Tips]

36 minutes ago, Windows7ge said:

@leadeater may have some helpful insight. Definitely more than myself.

 

Though I can comment on your desire for quad 10Gbit. If the previous configuration was only an link-aggregated 4Gbit do you really feed going 10x that is necessary? 1x10Gbit would already be 2.5x the bandwidth. 5x for 20Gbit. Unless you have multiple clients making massive file transfers (not too likely in a school) then I can't see going over 20Gbit worth it and that could save you a few $100 dollars. Maybe a $1000 depending on what 10Gbit quad NIC you really need for a professional reliable operation.

i see where you're coming from, however it's quad for redundancy. so only x1 10gb link would be active per host. cheers.

[Windows7ge]

22 minutes ago, Will.N.Dad said:

i see where you're coming from, however it's quad for redundancy. so only x1 10gb link would be active per host. cheers.

If that's the way you plan to configure it between two hosts you might as well setup link-aggregation as oppose to fail-over. This way you'll have the perk of double the bandwidth & what would effectively be fail-over.

[leadeater]

Just now, Windows7ge said:

If that's the way you plan to configure it between two hosts you might as well setup link-aggregation as oppose to fail-over. This way you'll have the perk of double the bandwidth & what would effectively be fail-over.

I think that is the plan, from what I understand the quad 10Gb requirement is for the SAN so each server can be dual pathed hence 4 ports required. The SAN would also need to be dual controller for that to be worthwhile also otherwise both paths go back to the same failure point.

[WnDTech.Tips]

1 minute ago, Windows7ge said:

If that's the way you plan to configure it between two hosts you might as well setup link-aggregation as oppose to fail-over. This way you'll have the perk of double the bandwidth & what would effectively be fail-over.

ah yes true dat ! very good point. cheers

[WnDTech.Tips]

Just now, leadeater said:

I think that is the plan, from what I understand the quad 10Gb requirement is for the SAN so each server can be dual pathed hence 4 ports required. The SAN would also need to be dual controller for that to be worthwhile also otherwise both paths go back to the same failure point.

ah yes.. forgot to specify that, our current san is duel controller. opps

[leadeater]

@Will.N.Dad

Out of interest what is the current SAN?

[leadeater]

Just now, Will.N.Dad said:

ah yes.. forgot to specify that, our current san is duel controller. opps

I just assumed that's what you had and needed 

[WnDTech.Tips]

Just now, leadeater said:

@Will.N.Dad

Out of interest what is the current SAN?

HP P2000 G3, yeah i know i could just replace the controllers but HP our supplier won't warranty the device any longer due to it's age.

  but we also want higher capacity too, and ideally not sas drives due to replacement costs.

[leadeater]

7 minutes ago, Will.N.Dad said:

HP P2000 G3, yeah i know i could just replace the controllers but HP our supplier won't warranty the device any longer due to it's age.

  but we also want higher capacity too, and ideally not sas drives due to replacement costs.

Yea at that age of product I would be looking at replacing it, more interested to know basically for pricing guidance for myself. The HP MSA systems are basically identical to the Lenovo V3700 I mentioned, one of those or just a new HPE of the same thing will do fine. Nearline SAS (NL-SAS) doesn't cost much more than SATA, you should try and stick to SAS as SATA disks aren't dual port so can't be dual pathed which has implications on expansion capabilities and options. NL-SAS is 7.2k RPM like SATA is but uses the SAS interface which is dual port.

 

Based on that the HPE 3PAR and Netapp FAS will be a price point above what you currently have.