We've been using NetApp for our tier 1 storage
and x86/x86_64 RAID systems for tier 2 (no snaps
or backups, but fast access) and tier 3 (archived
"write once read occasionally").  This has worked
pretty well, but the NetApp solution hasn't scaled
as well as we'd like.  On the other hand, it plays
really well with NFS, and we haven't had much in
the way of CIFS problems (we have some Windows and
Mac laptops using this).

But NetApp doesn't scale that well, and it's pretty
pricy.  We've been looking into other vendors, and
at the moment the leading contenders seem to be
Isilon and Pillar.

Anyone have any experience with these vendors and
any kudos or warnings?  95% of our computers and
data access are Linux (mostly EL4, a few EL3 and
EL5), but playing well with Mac and Windows systems
is also important.  Feel free to reply offlist if
you like ([log in to unmask]).

We run NFSv3 over TCP, NTP, DNS, NIS, all the usual
stuff.  We may use LDAP in the future, not sure yet.
We have a couple of Windows serves providing Windows
Domain services, etc.  Cisco switches (multiple GB
ethernet lines per filer head).  Fiber-attached
LTO4 robot for backups (will likely go to a SAN
switch for backups in the near future).

We will likely consolidate some of our tier 2 and
3 onto any new filers. but some will stay on the
x86_64 boxes for some time to come.

Performance, reliability, scalability- these are key.
We also need visibility into where the storage goes;
for instance to easily find all the storage used by
a user, and where it is.  We'd prefer not to have to
purchase a third party app for that (him NetApp).

We have all sorts of data, but it's almost all file
based (not relational databases, etc).  We need good
NFS performance whether it's writing 100GB files or
reading and writing directories with 100,000 files in
them.  It took some time, but we found the magic
combination for NetApps and the Linux boxes; I would
hope the Linux side of things would not change with
any good quality filer... any guidance?

Thanks,
Miles