Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
PeerSpot user
Solutions Architect with 51-200 employees
Vendor
Policies are applied to FlexVols but it would be useful if they could also be specified for an individual Virtual Volume.

Virtual Volumes is the flagship feature of vSphere 6.0 as they enable VM granular storage management and NetApp FAS running Clustered Data ONTAP 8.3 is one of the first platforms to support the technology.

Today storage administrators have to explain to the VM administrators how to identify which datastores to use for each class of VM, which is typically achieved using a combination of documentation and datastore naming conventions – however, consistency and compliance are difficult to achieve.

Virtual Volumes changes this by enabling the storage administrator to provide vCenter with detailed information on the capabilities of each datastore. VM Storage Policies, whilst they existed in previous versions of vSphere were not sophisticated enough to query the actual storage for its capabilities, the VMware APIs for Storage Awareness (VASA) Provider 2.0 resolves this problem. Now the VM administrator can create VMs using Virtual Volumes and use the VM Storage Policy wizard to easily determine which datastores are compatible with its needs.

What components are required for Virtual Volumes?

VASA Provider (VP)The NetApp VP is deployed as an OVA virtual appliance and is managed by the Virtual Storage Console plugged in to the vSphere Web Client. VMs running on Virtual Volumes require that the VP is running in order to create the swap Virtual Volume at power on – the VP should not be running on Virtual Volumes since it would be dependent on itself.

Storage Container (SC)A SC is a set of FlexVol volumes used for Virtual Volume datastores. All the FlexVols within a SC must be accessed using the same protocol (NFS, iSCSI, or FC) and be owned by the same Storage Virtual Machine (SVM), but they can be hosted on different aggregates and nodes of the NetApp cluster.

Protocol Endpoint (PE)The IO path to a Virtual Volume is through a PE with the Virtual Volume bound to the PE through a binding call managed by the VP. The VP determines which PE is on the same node as the FlexVol containing the Virtual Volume and binds the Virtual Volume to that PE.

For block protocols, a PE is a small (4MB) LUN, and the VP creates one PE in each FlexVol that is part of a Virtual Volume datastore. The PE is automatically mapped to initiator groups created and managed by the VP.

For NFS, a PE is a mount point to the root of the SVM and is created by the VP for each data LIF of the SVM using the LIF’s IP address. The PE is automatically created when the first Virtual Volume datastore is created on the SVM along with the appropriate export policy rules.

Storage Capability Profile (SCP)A SCP is a set of capabilities for a volume or set of volumes and may include features such as availability, performance, capacity, space efficiency, replication or protocol.

How could things be improved in the future?

Today De-duplication, Compression, SnapMirror and SnapVault policies are applied to FlexVols – it would be useful if they could also be specified for an individual Virtual Volume, which in turn would enable MetroCluster to non-disruptively “move” an active Virtual Volume from one site to another.

It is great to see that NetApp is ahead of the game with regard to support for Virtual Volumes – it is also nice to see that the 8.3 release can be installed on older versions of hardware allowing FAS customers, who purchased their systems a number of years ago, to take advantage of Virtual Volumes.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: We are Partners with NetApp.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
PeerSpot user
Solutions Architect with 51-200 employees
Vendor
NetApp do have a “pure” block storage array but it lacks the advanced data services enabled by WAFL

For many years traditional storage array vendors have claimed that their platforms are superior for block storage than NetApp FAS because they do not have the overhead of a Pointer-based Architecture – let’s explore this in more detail:

What do we mean by “pure” block storage?

Uses a Fixed Block Architecture whereby data is always read from and written to a fixed location (i.e. each block has its own Logical Block Address) – in reality most block storage arrays provide the option to use pages (ranging from 5 MB to 1 GB) where the LBA is fixed within the page, but the page can be moved to facilitate tiering.

The advantages of this architecture are:

  1. No performance overhead – it is very easy for the storage array to calculate the location of a block and there is no metadata to cache
  2. No capacity overhead – as there is no additional metadata to manage
  3. No fragmentation – blocks always remain together which enables good sequential IO performance on HDDs
  4. Lends itself to tiering – to automatically place data on the most appropriate drive

The disadvantages of this architecture are:

  1. Advanced data services – cannot be supported:
    1. Granular De-duplication, Compression and Thin Provisioning – typically 4K-32K
    2. Low-overhead snapshots – using Redirect-on-Write rather than Copy-on-Write
    3. Hypervisor technologies like Virtual Volumes (VVOLs) – as VMDKs need to be stored as objects/files
  2. Write performance overhead – especially when using parity RAID (i.e. R5 or R6)
  3. Replication performance overhead – when based on snapshots (as snapshots have a significant overhead)
  4. Separate block and NAS – NAS requires a separately managed file system to be laid on top of the block storage

How does NetApp FAS compare?

FAS uses a Pointer-based Architecture, utilising 4K blocks which can be located anywhere, called WAFL therefore we have to reverse the above list of advantages and disadvantages. NAS based file systems are delivered along with block storage on top of WAFL – block protocols do not sit on top of the NAS protocols instead they interact directly with WAFL.

The good news is that WAFL has been around since 1993 so it is a very mature and highly optimised technology – retrofitting advanced data services to a “pure” block storage array is not straight forward and requires major re-engineering work.

So which is best?

Well we can debate this endlessly and clearly depending on your use case one may be a better choice than the other – 5 years ago this was a valid debate, but to be honest it is a moot point as today all storage platforms have to support the advanced data services listed above and therefore need a Pointer-based rather than Fixed Block Architecture.

Let’s explore some examples of this:

  • VMware
    • Virtual SAN – version 2 will include the Virsto Pointer-based Architecture to enable RoW snapshots and clones, and moving forward many more of the advanced data services
  • EMC
    • VNX/VNXe – uses an 8K Pointer-based Architecture to provide RoW snapshots, De-duplication, Compression and Thin Provisioning
    • XtremIO – uses an 8K Pointer-based Architecture to provide RoW snapshots, De-duplication, Compression and Thin Provisioning
    • VMAX3 – uses 128K tracks to provide RoW snapshots and Thin Provisioning, and in the future support for VVOLs
  • HDS
    • HNAS – uses a 4K/32K Pointer-based Architecture to provide RoW snapshots, De-duplication and Thin Provisioning
    • VSP G1000 – the new Storage Virtualization Operating System (SVOS) was built with VVOLs in mind

It is also worth pointing out that all of the start-up storage vendors that have come onto the market in the last 5 years do not have “pure” block storage platforms – it would just not make sense if they did.

What is interesting is that NetApp do have a “pure” block storage array – the E-Series which provides excellent price/performance, but it lacks the advanced data services enabled by WAFL – also VVOLs support is not expected for some time.

So for me “pure” block storage is no longer sustainable and dismissing products like NetApp FAS because they are not “pure” block no longer makes sense. Moving forward the issue is not that your storage platform has a ground-up all-flash design, but does it have a ground-up Pointer-based Architecture.

“Pure” block storage is dead – long live WAFL and the like.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: We are Partners with NetApp.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
it_user186357 - PeerSpot reviewer
it_user186357Solutions Architect with 51-200 employees
Vendor
Report as inappropriate

Please post any questions at blog.snsltd.co.uk

Best regards
Mark

Like(0)Reply
See all 2 comments
Buyer's Guide
NetApp FAS Series
November 2024
Free Report: NetApp FAS Series Reviews and More
Learn what your peers think about NetApp FAS Series. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2024.
DOWNLOAD NOW
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
it_user527118 - PeerSpot reviewer
Systems Engineer at a media company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Vendor
Download
Supports anything from Windows CIFS shares to UNIX NFS shares to block-level storage.

What is most valuable?

Its flexibility: It will support anything; from Windows CIFS shares, to UNIX NFS shares, to block-level storage; on the same platform; on the same disks; with the same interface. It's not specific to one set or another set.

How has it helped my organization?

I'm not sure that I can comment. This is what we've always used, so I have nothing to compare it to.

It has a steep learning curve. Once you've reached the top of that curve, though, it's much easier to manage since it is all in the same system. You don't have a separate system to manage block-level storage or a separate system to manage other types of shares.

What needs improvement?

One of the issues that we have had with NetApp in upgrading over the years is that migrating data from one system to another is one-way only. If you have a new storage system that is going to replace an old storage system, where you're transitioning slowly from one to another, you can copy the data in one direction, but that same tool, which is typically used as a disaster recovery tool, can't be used to reset it back the other direction, as well. That level of backward compatibility would be very nice to have.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

In the 20-some years I've been working with NetApp stuff, the system has caused one outage. Other than that, for any of the failure that it's had, the redundancy that is built into it, has handled the failure and left the systems up and the data available.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is very scalable. It has gotten much more scalable. With every level, it's becoming more and more scalable.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support directly from NetApp is usually very, very good. As compared to others, the expertise that the individual that you talk to on the phone is usually very good. You can talk directly to an engineer, if that's required. We’ve actually talked to hardware development people on occasion, when that has been required.

The support team is very knowledgeable and very accessible.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We invest in a new solution when the existing solution goes out of its initial support. We have been looking for new options for about six months now because the extended support is very, very expensive.

How was the initial setup?

I was involved in migrations from one system to another system. The initial setup, the cabling, the hardware side of it is tedious.

Have NetApp come in and do the initial install of the physical system for you. It's definitely worth the time.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We are looking at Pure Storage. We have looked at and discarded an EMC option. That's why I recently attended a NetApp conference. We were looking to see the next level of the NetApp All-Flash FAS.

We rejected the EMC option because we had an EMC piece of gear in-house that had a failure. It continued to operate, like it's supposed to. The problem was that the part on the piece of EMC gear that failed could not be replaced without causing downtime. It might as well have just caused the downtime initially. We have migrated everything off of that. It was a stupid little thing. It wasn’t like the backplane failed; it was a stupid little thing. I would not recommend it, and we will probably never go with EMC again.

What other advice do I have?

Take your time. It's a very dynamic market right now. Make sure that the information that you're getting on the system is for what's currently available and not for what they're expecting to have next quarter. Because, a lot of the next-quarter stuff is vapor, where they don't actually have it. They haven't gotten around to putting that in place, yet, and they promise and promise until they get money from you.

That's one of the reasons why we're holding off on making a decision until the gear is actually available.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
it_user354033 - PeerSpot reviewer
Product Owner Storage at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Download
We are an online hotel reservations company, so if our website goes down we lose money at a very high rate per minute. It has been many years since we have had an outage due to storage because of FAS.

Valuable Features

  • Reliability
  • Snapshots
  • Ease of tooling
  • Integration with our systems
  • It's multiprotocol

Improvements to My Organization

We are an online hotel reservations company, so if our website goes down we lose money at a very high rate per minute. It has been many years since we have had an outage due to storage because of FAS.

Room for Improvement

The performance needs to be improved. Due to the performance issues, we're moving to NetApp Flash FAS as it provides almost infinite performance.

Use of Solution

We've used it for nine years.

Deployment Issues

We've had no issues with deployment.

Stability Issues

The stability is excellent.

Scalability Issues

It's scaled well for us.

Customer Service and Technical Support

It takes a long time to resolve most cases. It requires an extensive amount of troubleshooting and tends to be very time consuming on our end in terms of collecting data for the engineers to work on.

Initial Setup

It's straightforward. I'd say, though, that it's medium complexity because it is not done in one day.

Implementation Team

We used a mixed team of in-house and vendor personnel.

ROI

I wouldn't know how to begin to calculate it.

Other Solutions Considered

That was a long time before I joined the company.

Other Advice

Do your research on clustered Data ONTAP as it is a very complicated product, much more complicated than the previous version.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: I used to work for NetApp as a consultant.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
reviewer1451304 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at a maritime company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Download
Excellent and proactive support, reliable, easy to set up, and you can scale as many as you have
Pros and Cons
  • "The most valuable features are the NAS features and NetApp's excellent support."
  • "There is no NetApp infrastructure set up here in Greece."

What is our primary use case?

We are mainly using this solution for file sharing, virtualization, and database storage.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are the NAS features and NetApp's excellent support.

It's user-friendly, and I am happy with the dashboard, customization, and security.

What needs improvement?

For the most part, we don't have any problems. There is no NetApp infrastructure set up here in Greece. We don't have a representative with a technical department and someone who will help you in order to understand the product better.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for seven years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's very stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It's scalable. You can scale as much as you can have.

We have approximately 500 end-users in our organization.

How are customer service and technical support?

We have contacted technical support either by phone or via email, and sometimes they have contacted me first because they have noticed something in their systems.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was straightforward.

What about the implementation team?

We used an integrator to help us with the deployment.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I don't recall the price, but in general, pricing can always be better.

What other advice do I have?

I would definitely recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

I would rate NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
it_user806046 - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant
Consultant
Download
Very easy to expand disks and manage CIFS
Pros and Cons
  • "It is very easy to expand disks and manage CIFS."
  • "Has rock solid reliability and is easy to use."
  • "Needs to ​add wizards for newer, inexperienced users."

What is our primary use case?

Enterprise Storage for:

  • Block and file
  • SQL Server LUNs
  • Exchange LUNs
  • VM Storage. 

Backup of above via Snap products.

How has it helped my organization?

  • Rock solid reliability
  • Easy to use
  • Very easy to expand disks and manage CIFS.
  • It has been over seven years with no outages.

What is most valuable?

  • SnapManagers for SQL
  • Exchange and Oracle
  • SnapMirror for DR
  • CIFS management for shares/permissions

What needs improvement?

  • Add wizards for newer, inexperienced users. 
  • More modern GUI, not that it's bad. 
  • ONTAP upgrades need to be much easier.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
it_user821337 - PeerSpot reviewer
‎Cloud Plattform Architect at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Download
Integrated snapshot and backup capability
Pros and Cons
  • "It has integrated snapshot and backup capability."
  • "Needs to improve the adaptive storage quality of service."

What is our primary use case?

NAS part of standardized virtualization platform, ranging from size from 15TB on-site solution to more than 500TB twin core datacenter.

How has it helped my organization?

  • Cost effective storage for all performance levels (including all-flash)
  • Integrated snapshot and backup capability
  • Many protocols
  • Good service

What is most valuable?

  • Integrated backup functionality (SnapVault and SnapMirror)
  • Option to mirror synchronously

What needs improvement?

  • Automation readiness
  • API exposure
  • Adaptive storage quality of service

For how long have I used the solution?

Three to five years.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
it_user614595 - PeerSpot reviewer
ICT Network Administrator at a maritime company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Download
The initial setup was quite easy and pleasing. Just enter some key values and there you go.
Pros and Cons
  • "A reliable and easily managed storage system is a key performance factor. The system also has more features than we require."
  • "As I see it, there could be more interfaces, more cache, etc."

What is most valuable?

  • Reliability
  • Rich features
  • Ease of management
  • Excellent support

A reliable and easily managed storage system is a key performance factor. The system also has more features than we require.

What needs improvement?

Naturally, there would be room for improvement. As I see it, there could be more interfaces, more cache, etc., but those challenges are solved by just getting some other model.

For how long have I used the solution?

Four years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

None whatsoever.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

No issues, as expansion was a breeze.

How are customer service and technical support?

We do use third party support. On a scale of one to 10, I would rate the support to be an eight.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

During the years, we have had quite a few storage solutions, none of which did give us the same level performance, reliability, and manageability as the FAS-series has.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was quite easy and pleasing. Just enter some key values and there you go.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

For a number of years now, purchasing a storage system has been actually purchasing software. There is no plain storage anymore, more or less intelligent software solutions. Thus, licenses are required to fulfill the business demands. One considering between different storage system should carefully investigate what software options they get bundled in and what optional software they actually would need. Most storage vendors also have software, or licensing bundles, which may offer the required licenses considerably cheaper, but do also maybe offer licenses, which are not needed.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

No other solutions were evaluated at the time. Actually, this system was familiar to use and fulfilled the business demands.

What other advice do I have?

You really can't go wrong with NetApp products, They perform well, are rock solid, offer good space saving technologies, and the support is above par.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Download our free NetApp FAS Series Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
Updated: November 2024
DOWNLOAD NOW
Buyer's Guide
Download our free NetApp FAS Series Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
Buyer's Guide
NetApp FAS Series
November 2024
DOWNLOAD NOW
Quick Links
Learn More: Questions: