From owner-freebsd-isp  Fri Jul 14  3:10:53 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org
Received: from shell.futuresouth.com (shell.futuresouth.com [198.78.58.28])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D0BF37C6E1
	for <freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 03:10:51 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from tim@futuresouth.com)
Received: (from tim@localhost)
	by shell.futuresouth.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id FAA08487;
	Fri, 14 Jul 2000 05:10:48 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 05:10:48 -0500
From: Tim Tsai <tim@futuresouth.com>
To: Michael O Shea <micheal@com4u.ch>
Cc: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: centralized storage for server farm?
Message-ID: <20000714051048.A8447@futuresouth.com>
References: <20000707122545.B8474@dan.emsphone.com> <PNENKIKMOHECNEIGAACBGEJGCOAA.archive@in-design.com> <20000714031709.A3274@futuresouth.com> <p04320404b5947d9943c1@[10.10.10.150]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre3i
In-Reply-To: <p04320404b5947d9943c1@[10.10.10.150]>
Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

On Fri, Jul 14, 2000 at 10:21:09AM +0200, Michael O Shea wrote:
> >We are already considering a NetApp but NFS isn't the right solution for
> >everything.
>
> Well to us it was. The NetApp sits at the back with FiberChannel to 2 
> 3Com switches.
>  From there many hosts mount it via NFS and CIFS. It is rock solid.

  Well, I wouldn't want to run databases over NFS or CIFS, for example.

  Tim


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message