Powerstore NVMe

Powerstore was a new development or at least they start with fresh ideas and thats the reason why they drop legacy technology. The NVMe disks for the SAN Head are the slowest available option within the Powerstore. With up to 21 fast disks you can easy fill any existing pipe.

A powerstore expansion enclosure is connected via SAS and thats the reason why it doesnt make sense to put in NVMe or faster disks into it because the SAS connection would be the bottleneck. As in most SANs its more for capacity reasons rather than adding for speed.

My customer loves powerstore and i cant await the first NVMeoF deployment.

Regards,
Joerg

Could you explain the NVMe communication protocol in base enclosure?

Also why a hypervisor is installed in powerstore x and not in powerstore t?

So about SAS, NVMe provides speed so how is that a disadvantage for increasing capacity?

PowerStore provides flexibility to customers in choosing whether they want to go with a deployment model with or without the AppsON capability. If they do want AppsON, hypervisor would be installed on the appliance and it would be a "PowerStore X" type by definition. 

I understand it but the question is why? is it because powerstore x handles heavy applications or any other reasons

Ignore the 'why' question. Does powerstore  T uses appsON feature

PowerStore X has AppsON capabilities, whereas PowerStore T models do not. 

One more question: Why is the system cache for each powerstore series(ex: for 1000, it is 384 GB, 3000, it is 768 GB) given a certain memory ?

The raw capacity for powerstore T is 11.5 TB-3.9PB and for powerstore X is 11.5 TB-898 TB. Both models have their differences but why powerstore T is given a long range when powerstore x is handling higher applications compared to powerstore T?  

We have different PowerStore models in order to cater to the different performance requirements from our customers. Smaller models have smaller amount of HW resources available to begin with, and we optimize the usage of those HW resources to provide the best performance possible.

Can you point out the document where you saw that PowerStore T and PowerStore X appliances have different maximum capacity limits?

The above mentioned capacity for Powerstore T is in terms of per cluster and for Powerstore X is in terms of per appliance. But per appliance capacity for both models is the same.

Before the release of PowerStoreOS 2.0 release, PowerStore X appliances did not support scale out (i.e. multiple PowerStore X appliances in the same PowerStore cluster). Therefore the maximum limit stated for the cluster was the same as a single PowerStore X appliance. 

For clarity, PowerStore X appliances support scale out now and the capacity limits for a PowerStore cluster should be the same irrespective of whether the customer is using PowerStore T or PowerStore X appliances. Please point out any documentation where this update has not been made and we will work on correcting that asap.