SAN was RE: system p announcement

Not to be an internal disk bigot but I think there are some things to
consider. Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of benefits to a SAN and
I would like to make transition assuming all business and technical
factors are positive. However, some things to consider are:

Time. I manage multiple terabytes of data (db2, Domino, etc.) and by my
calculations I use .03 of an FTE to manage anything that is related to
storage (space, backups, performance, etc.) My belief is that a SAN
will require much more care and feeding than .03. I'm not knocking
benefits by any stretch. I just can't afford to do so without reducing
efforts in another area. Yes that is .03, not .3. And that's not
because I'm some wiz (especially since my wife tells me I'm not) I think
that is typical in most System i installations.

SAN ownership - SAN's are typically owned by non-System i admin types.
This means that problem determination may span multiple bodies. As well
as ongoing support etc. It adds complexity that didn't exist in the
internal storage world. Not a problem of SAN's but a reality of our
world I think.

Visibility - I don't believe the current tools allow a System i
administrator good visibility into the performance characteristics of a
SAN. You have those today with internal disks. If there is a question
of performance issues you again have to span different technologies and
potentially different people.

Cost to transition - hard for me to explain but as we make some system
changes I sometimes have to carry over older drives in order to keep
costs flat. Every time I've looked at a potential SAN solution it tends
to put me in a cost increase situation. It's a blip and over time you
should be able to decrease costs but it's a hurdle none-the-less.

My stick in the mud pricing attitude - SAN storage is almost a must in
other environments and I think other systems gain much more from a
functionality and cost standpoint. Therefore I always think I should
have to pay less for any SAN storage that is attached to a System i.
Probably not a valid requirement but I always throw that requirement out
to the storage vendors to see if they ever would accept it! "Hey boss,
we got this solution at 50% off because we are attaching to a System i".
Wouldn't that be cool :-)

To me the biggest hurdle is the time issue because I would have to pick
up the time demands of the external storage. But I would never dismiss
it without some due consideration.

Michael Crump

Manager, Computing Services
Saint-Gobain Containers, Inc.
1509 S. Macedonia Ave.
Muncie, IN 47302
765.741.7696
765.741.7012 f

"You don't win a war by dying for your country. You win a war by making
the other son-of-a-bitch die for his."
General Patton
This email and its attachments may be confidential and are intended
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views
or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not
necessarily represent those of Saint-Gobain. If it did, it would be
folded, mutilated, watered down, politically corrected, and would show
up a week later if at all. If you are not the intended recipient of
this email and its attachments, you must take no action based upon them,
nor must you copy or show them to anyone.
Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in
error.

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of rob@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:07 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: system p announcement

I guess I just like the "SAN" on my i5 instead. It's what I know. I
can
add disk drives to it without disrupting operations, and so on. That
"what I know" helps to drive down the TCO.

Rob Berendt