RATE THIS ANSWER
0
Click to Vote:
- 0
0
Last Answered:
Oct 20 2005 10:38 AM GMT
by klewis
As with all things, "It depends". For such a smaller number of hosts talking to a single array, your performance isn't likely to be constrained by your transport - iSCSI or FC. Your performance is going to be constrained by the number of disk spindles.
As far as the two technologies go, unless you're doing OLTP, iSCSI won't add too much overhead. If you are, you'll find that the network overhead might not be to your liking.
I think you should compare the cost of the two back-end systems when configured with a similar number of disks and cache, then compare the cost of infrastracture needed to enable the two - new FC or GigE switches needed, HBAs, etc.
SAN, Fibre channel SAN, SQL Server 2000, iSCSI, CLARiiON, CX500i, EMC, Flexline 340, Fibre channel
We are trying to determine if there is any impact to MS SQL 2000 servers given either a iSCSI SAN vs Fibre Channel SAN. The majority of the databases are read/query intensive during the day, and write intensive during the overnight job cycle. Currently we have 8 SQL database servers (Windows 2000) which we would like to attach to a SAN with FC disks. Haven't found much information comparing these 2 technologies specifically for SQL servers. We are comparing EMC CX500i vs StorageTek Flexline 340 (FC). Any information would be helfpul with this or with how to select the right technology. Thank you. 
