I certainly could have created the same configuration using conventional storage solutions instead of SAN/iQ. However, it probably would come at a cost and a level of complexity that makes similar ironclad data protection only a dream for many midsize companies.

My second exercise was to measure how adding more nodes to a cluster improves performance. To simplify the test, I shrank my primary cluster down to a single node via the management console, an activity just as easy and nondisruptive as adding nodes.

From my application server, I prepared Iometer to run a standard script with random read/writes of 8KB and set the number of outstanding I/Os to 32. After starting the test, Iometer settled around 1,000 IOPS (I/O operations per second). Without stopping the benchmark, I added a second node: The IOPS dropped to the low hundreds while SAN/iQ was restriping the volume across the two nodes. Notably, you can easily contain the performance drop during restriping by setting a threshold from the management console, which I didn't bother doing during my testing.

A few minutes later, the restriping completed and I saw Iometer showing about 1,900 IOPS on that volume, which was, as I expected, about twice the performance measured on a single node. Adding a third node produced a similar linear increase in the performance.

Based on my testing, it's difficult to find fault in SAN/iQ, perhaps because it's difficult to compare the product to traditional, array-centered storage solutions. Based on my review, though, I can say that SAN/iQ is easy to manage, scales well, and includes tools to create a responsive and safe storage platform for your databases at a reasonable price. Keep SAN/iQ in mind if your company is growing fast.