What type of switch is used with an iscsi san

SAN is a dedicated high-speed network or subnetwork that interconnects and presents shared pools of storage devices to multiple servers.

LAN switching is a form of packet switching in which the data packets are transferred from one computer to another over the LAN network. LAN switching technology is a vital part of the network design which helps to improve the overall efficiency of LAN and address the existing bandwidth issues.

All three types of layer switching 2, 3, and 4 are combined in MLS. LAN switch is an IP-based Ethernet switch that flexibly connects the transmitter and receiver through a network of interconnected ports and links to allow network resources shared by a large number of end-users.

LAN switches are packet switches that support multiple simultaneous transmissions, reading the destination address of each frame and forwarding it directly to the port associated with the target device. Fabric Capacity is the same way. The number that you are showing here is an "under the hood" detail that you really don't care about.

It is like stating the cubic litre displacement of a truck engine. Yeah, that's interesting. But what matters is how quickly the Snowman can drive your load of Coors to Texarkana - not the displacement of the engine in the truck that he is using. Same with switching fabric. What is often stated is that the switching fabric must be at least the aggregate of the ports on your switch. All of these are. Anything more than that is pointless as it has no value - the ports can't carry more capacity.

It DOES matter if you are stacking switches, which you are not, so in this case it is a worthless number - none of these are better or worse based on that number than the others. What you care about for switch "speed", especially for things like iSCSI, is the actual throughput of a port can the port maintain full GigE line speed and latency. I'm sure that all of these switches can maintain GigE line speed without breaking a sweat. So what matters here is port to port latency times.

And this is where the unmanaged Netgear is said in real lab tests, not anecdotal experience to blow the others away. It's ability to rapidly move packets from one port to another with less processing time is where it makes your SAN more responsive. No one really pumps GigE at wire speed continuously. That's just a nice theory. But cutting the milliseconds that it takes for a request to go and return from the SAN can make a big different in responsiveness.

None of these switches is bad. You are looking at TINY differences in latency used for extremely high end tweaking. No SMB is likely to actually be able to measure the differences in performance.

But, if you really want the best possible speeds then unmanaged Netgears have measured out the best. The big deal is not that they are faster but that they are so much cheaper without being slower. The fact that they are faster is just icing. When I get the project done I will post what I have done and put into place. Fibre Channel FC and iSCSI are two key SAN-related technologies and these two technologies solve the same technical problem of networking block storage while have been positioned as fierce competitors.

Both NAS and iSCSI were developed to help cover the exponentially increasing need for storage capacity by means of external, scalable storage devices that can be networked if necessary. This helps to make a redundancy connection for storage data in case of network failure. A consumer-grade switch often does not support wire-speed connections between multiple ports, therefore they may drop packets without warning. Lastly, if your servers have single-Gigabit connections to an Ethernet switch for access to disk arrays, they are vulnerable to failure on that link.

You need failover as you will have "all of your eggs in one basket" So generally you use 2 different NICs on the Server to connect to 2 different switches, that connect to 2 different management ports on the Storage Array.

See the attached picture. You sometimes see Jumbo Packets enabled for storage Bytes i na frams instead of Bytes in a frame but this is for specific instances. With regard the SAN, we need more specific info, make, model, controller type as there are many, many different SANs Generally the 8 ports are probably 4 on one controller and 4 on another controller.

At least 2 of those 1 per controller will be management ports for the SAN so you can monitor, configure and see whats going on. The next person can fix it!

New to the forum? Read this. Reply with quote 3. Hi Joe, Thanks for posting! It is wonderfully useful. I guess I will keep researching to determine if that level of hardware is what we want versus need. I am looking to unify our storage in the most efficient way possible. Right now it's a bunch of jbods hung off various servers. Do you have thoughts as to a more efficient solution? Reply with quote 4. Few questions before you go much further.