What is most valuable?
- Multi-site SAN (near-real-time replication)
- Ability to assign Servers/LUNs to a physical/logical site for better access avoiding high-latency connections
- Space reclamation
- Thin/full provisioning
- Maintenance and support is easy to do.
- There are two 10GB ports present next to four GB ports, which makes it easy to upgrade the network .
How has it helped my organization?
Server provisioning and capacity expansion are much easier than before.
What needs improvement?
StoreVirtual should offer QoS per v-disk or ISCSi.
For how long have I used the solution?
We've been using the 4500 for three years, and the 4730 for one year.
What was my experience with deployment of the solution?
We had no deployment issues.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
There were no issues with the stability.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
We have had no issues scaling it for our needs.
How are customer service and technical support?
9/10 From disk replacement to software support, the response from technical support is always excellent.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Initially, we used a HP entry level "SAN" HP P2000 G2. It was for our initial virtualization project.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup was pretty straightforward as HP did a good job providing excellent documentation and best practices.
What about the implementation team?
We implemented it via an in-house service. Testing different workloads on your SAN is a good idea. This helps you to have a comparison point for later users. In case people encounter trouble in production, you can then easily compare performance with the different workloads.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Over a period of five years, we created 40-45 VMs. Previously, we had a physical server, storage, and backup solution, which was about $5,000 per server. We made a serious savings compared to the price of the SAN solution.