TECH::Why I prefer NAS over SAN (and why you might, too!)

2000px-Human-folder-remote-nfs.svgWhen thinking of NAS in relation to SAN, it’s just hard to say one is better than the other any more. How does one quantify something like that as “better” in today’s modern abstracted datacenter?

As a Technical Marketing Engineer for NFS, I could certainly think of reasons NAS is better, but even I could make a valid argument for SAN in some instances. Datacenters are not one-size-fits-all and not every nail uses the same hammer.

It’s another classic case of “it depends.”


For instance, if your workload uses a single server/cluster and doesn’t need to be accessed by multiple clients at the same time, doesn’t need to worry about ACLs and doesn’t need to be client-agnostic, then SAN might make more sense. But what about NAS?

Wait, aren’t SAN and NAS the same thing?

SAN and NAS are often confused with each other, given they use the same subset of letters in their acronyms and that the general concept is the same – accessing data over a network. In fact, when I’ve asked the question in interviews, people often stumble over what the difference between the two is, and instead, offer the acronym definitions.

SAN = Storage Area Network
NAS = Network Attached Storage

At the surface, they certainly don’t sound very different. However, there are many differences between the two.

So, why do I prefer NAS over SAN?

Find out at!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s