Hi Guys,
We're looking to move to a virtualized environment for our Head Office servers.
We currently have 12 physical servers that we're going to move to two virtual servers. None of these servers have particularly high disk I/O's and we currently have around 1TB of used disk space between all of them.
Several systems integrators have tendered for the project with the two in the shortlist both offering HP solutions.
One is suggesting we move to a HP EVA 4400 the other is suggesting a MSA 2012fc.
The EVA 4400 is the more expensive option and I'm just wondering if there is any real benefit going with it.
The SAN's have both been specced with ample capacity for future growth, so is there anything the EVA provides over the MSA that is a real deal breaker?
We're looking to move to a virtualized environment for our Head Office servers.
We currently have 12 physical servers that we're going to move to two virtual servers. None of these servers have particularly high disk I/O's and we currently have around 1TB of used disk space between all of them.
Several systems integrators have tendered for the project with the two in the shortlist both offering HP solutions.
One is suggesting we move to a HP EVA 4400 the other is suggesting a MSA 2012fc.
The EVA 4400 is the more expensive option and I'm just wondering if there is any real benefit going with it.
The SAN's have both been specced with ample capacity for future growth, so is there anything the EVA provides over the MSA that is a real deal breaker?