What are the pros and cons of SAN scalability versus cloud storage?

let's weigh the advantages and disadvantages of Storage Area Network (SAN) scalability against cloud storage. A SAN, a network linking storage devices like hard disks or solid-state drives to servers, offers high-performance, reliable, and secure solutions for data-intensive applications. It facilitates multiple servers accessing a shared storage pool, supporting features like data replication, backup, recovery, and migration. However, SAN scalability entails a significant upfront investment and ongoing maintenance efforts. On the other side, cloud storage, provided by Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, or Google Cloud Platform, transforms data storage and access over the internet.

One of the Concern with SAN is we need to have skilled resource with specific to which vendor devices we are having. Where as in Cloud, we no need to have dedicate resource to manage cloud storage, system admin can manage cloud storage & the operating system

Even at cloud era SAN still have your principies and will be this for a long time i think. For really huge throughput environments or sensitive data a company can choose stay in a datacenter with your SAN and storages and use cloud to web applications and others things. The right way isn't discuss cloud vs on premise We will never stay at all just on a side! The right way is use both taking your advantages to your environment and budget.

let's explore the nuances of SAN scalability and cloud storage. SAN scalability, with its on-premise robustness, provides high-performance data management. It caters to organizations with specific security and compliance needs, ensuring data remains within physical confines. However, this solution demands a hefty upfront investment and ongoing maintenance efforts. On the other hand, cloud storage offers the convenience of data storage and access over the internet, emphasizing scalability, flexibility, and accessibility. It eliminates the need for managing in-house storage infrastructure. Yet, concerns about data security, potential latency, and reliance on external service providers loom as trade-offs.

I think Block cloud storage is only available on-premise, so Cloud and SAN because of different philosophy, have different use case. We cant replace SAN by Cloud without changing the manner of using the storage by the Server or the apllications. Except if the SAN is part of the cloud storage instead of agregation of server with storage within.

Data management in cloud have a lot of advantages like easy and fast way to allocate or move and all support to different kinds of protocols S3 CIFS NFS or ISCSI. But it must be well managed about backup and restores and retention time since you will be billed by how much data you had transfer. So duplicate with your data due backups and long retention time will be a big and expensive problem further if you don't take care on your initial cloud data planning.

I feel quite skeptical relating the use of Cloud storage, how can companies protect themselves using Cloud if the world are facing so many natural disasters that make people go offline?

when it is said "You can increase your storage capacity and performance as your data grows, without impacting your existing applications or systems.", it's true if you enlarge the original volume put if you migrate to another storage array, you have some work unless if , on the client, in front of the LUN you put an abstraction layer, like LVM on linux Server. Otherwise you have to sync the original directory to the newer and after you have to umount the old and mount the new .

Choosing SAN imo boils down to performance and security. Unlike cloud based solutions SAN solutions give you much more control over the configuration of your storage. Spanning volumes over multiple LUNs residing on different pools can result in better in performance when accessed in parallel. These days I don’t think cost is that much of a concern. Yes cloud is more expensive but comes with a lower cost of management.

You have full control to make your investments and decisions as you needs. A lot of different kind of disks/prices/performance do a mix and build a tierized storage set your storage policy to handle automatically manage data moves to high performance tier disk move it back when it don't needs stay at high performance tier. Increase a existing LUN easy fast and with no risk way. You have deduplication/compress/thin provision to bring more usable space than your physical space. Use your storage to do part of your backup with a fast and trusty solution using disk clones and snapshots features. You can have a storage to storage replication to a DR site with synchronous data and low RPO/RTO.

Honestly, cost isn’t the issue, complexity is. When you reduce the cost to price per GB cloud storage is higher, but where you make up for it is on management.

high prices is a true problem considering all infrastructure. SAN Switch's FC cables FC Cards SFP's storage hardware and tools to monitor and manage it's all. You must have skilled professional or a team to manage your data and use all possibilities and features to keep your data safe and don't use more storage space than you really need to recover it when needed fast. SAN must be used only for your essential part of your environment. Use file or object storage with lan network or a cloud storage to other part of your environment.

Cloud storage services often come with synchronization features that ensure your data remains consistent across all your devices. When you update a file on your laptop, it automatically updates on your smartphone and tablet. As a result, simplifies data management since you can have all the latest versions of your files at your fingertips.

I'm storage professional at least 10 years so storage in cloud is really just a few clicks. Simple and fast no way to do anything wrong! No new configurations no hardwares drivers firmwares infra changes no zoning or mapping needed!

Storage arrays are easy too. Servers for Cloud storage must be maintained too. But its true, buy servers is often cheaper. Compatibility is a matter of respecting S3 standards and version differences between cloud storage and Openstack for example. But keeping the openstack up and running can be impossible if you don't maintain/control the storage.

I've been in IT for nearly 30 years now, and it has always been the same thing; do we do things in house, or do we outsource? Do we consolidate our operations in a central location or distribute them throughout the enterprise where they are most needed. Cloud vs local is just the latest iteration of this, which started in my career with the IBM System 3090 and the 5250 terminals vs. the PCs that were just beginning to penetrate the workplace. If security and control are your major concerns, keep things in-house with a local data center and a SAN. If flexibility and cost are your major concerns go with the cloud. No matter what the consultants are selling you, or how badly the shareholders want it, you can't have everything.

Diving into storage dynamics, let's explore the merits and pitfalls of Storage Area Network (SAN) scalability versus cloud storage. SAN, connecting storage devices, offers robust data solutions, supporting features like data replication, backup, recovery, and migration. However, SAN scalability demands a hefty upfront investment and ongoing maintenance. Cloud storage, from providers like AWS or Azure, transforms data access, offering scalability and flexibility. Yet, drawbacks include reliance on internet connectivity, less data control, and challenges in compliance and data migration between on-premises and the cloud. Navigating these aspects demands a nuanced approach.

Cloud is not magic, he has to be relevant for your needs or yours apps. Some are Cloud ready, some not. Delagate your infra Cloud is a choice you have to balance, you have to trust your provider. Control is better on premise but you have to maintain Servers and staff to administer. Encryption before store on cloud is a solution too. Choosing a solution is a brainstorm, you cant decide without reflections. You don't have to succumb to Cloud fashion.

If your data needs to be up 24/7 and fast access, SAN is really your only option. SAN doesnt rely on TCP/IP where everything else does (iSCSI, cloud). Cloud storage is great for backups, but should never be used as a online storage. If it is on the internet, then it isnt 24/7 and you must accept that you may have extended downtimes.

Two truths: 1. There is no "Cloud". There's just storage owned by someone else. 2. Data is not just Data. Trusting a 3rd party site. As if a contract with someone else would save our company if we suffered a data breach due to a third party... It won't. Or save our job.... It won't. If you're storing sensitive or financial data, you have a LEGAL OBLIGATION to control access to that data. Signing a contract with a third party provider does NOT negate your responsibility . Data is not data. If it's sensitive, or financial, it MUST stay in your control. Ticketmaster had a Data Breach this year. Nothing personal Ticketmaster, but ya made Taylor Swift mad. Standby... Watch an unscheduled exit of the decider....