As long as the applications support Nas [network attached storage], there is no real reason to avoid Nas.
Exchange is one example of an application that does not support Nas, and most high-end database applications use San [storage area network]. Remember that Nas works at a higher layer and offers more intelligence but introduces a bit more latency that limits performance. San platforms also have the benefit of incumbency -- it's already deployed in the organisation and supported with experience and expertise.
By submitting your email address, you agree to receive emails regarding relevant topic offers from TechTarget and its partners. You can withdraw your consent at any time. Contact TechTarget at 275 Grove Street, Newton, MA.
I believe that Nas is great for the world of persistent data, and San is great for the blazing fast transactional world, so I like a combination of the two. But it's all based around best practices. I know companies that have an all Nas environment, though maybe they throw in a little iSCSI to support email. Those users employ Nas with high-end mission-critical databases and it's working fine. So there is no absolute method or approach -- it's all about what you want to do, but I like the idea of merging these technologies together so that multiple protocols can be served up for a single storage system.
Check out the entire Nas FAQ guide.