<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>SeanClark.us - Latest Comments in Compellent Storage Center 5: Best SAN for VMware VMFS</title><link>http://seanclarkus.disqus.com/</link><description>Professional Blog of Sean Clark</description><atom:link href="https://seanclarkus.disqus.com/compellent_storage_center_5_best_san_for_vmware_vmfs/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sun, 11 Jul 2010 11:01:17 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Compellent Storage Center 5: Best SAN for VMware VMFS</title><link>http://seanclark.us/?p=286#comment-61561943</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I never did such a reseach of VM. But I think it's very useful.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Uninstall Program</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 11 Jul 2010 11:01:17 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Compellent Storage Center 5: Best SAN for VMware VMFS</title><link>http://seanclark.us/?p=286#comment-30258289</link><description>&lt;p&gt;No. I think it just means performance for your randomly accessed blocks will continue to kick arse, but your sequential I/O to same VMFS volume would continue to be slowed down because of the interruption of random I/O at the VMware level.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;A Compellent storage architect would be more qualified to answer, but the slowdown that Scott is talking about is at VMware level and independent of the type of storage.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">vseanclark</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 13:54:14 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Compellent Storage Center 5: Best SAN for VMware VMFS</title><link>http://seanclark.us/?p=286#comment-30199695</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Very interesting article!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Scott Drummonds posted an article about how disastrous in terms of I/O could be the mix of sequential and random workloads on the same LUN. Read more at &lt;a href="http://vpivot.com/2010/01/15/virtual-storage-design-application-consolidation" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://vpivot.com/2010/01/15/virtual-storage-design-application-consolidation"&gt;http://vpivot.com/2010/01/1...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Does that product solve issues I'm talking about in a commt at &lt;a href="http://vpivot.com/2010/01/15/virtual-storage-design-application-consolidation/#comment-287" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://vpivot.com/2010/01/15/virtual-storage-design-application-consolidation/#comment-287"&gt;http://vpivot.com/2010/01/1...&lt;/a&gt; ?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">PiroNet</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 04:13:25 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>