I'm looking at a SAN for the sole purpose of eliminating the one-to-one relationship between disk enclosures and servers. I have some half empty arrays, and some that are maxed out, and its very inefficient (long term).
I don't put much stock in the crap that can't work anyway, like snapshots, etc. ------------------------------------------------------ Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA > -----Original Message----- > From: MS Exchange List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 3:35 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: the IBM Shark > > > > Hello, > > I can offer 1 data point of E2K on a SAN: > > It worked fine for about a year, but then began failing about > every 3 weeks. Several of the failures required Disaster > Recovery for the DBs. Strangely it always happened just > before I was going on a vacation, which does something bad > for Quality of Life if you're married, etc... > > Vendor replaced just about every single piece of hardware > over the various failures. On the last one I DR'd to a JBOD > we had laying around and everything has been fine since. A > relaxing Thanksgiving. > > I had great hopes for Snapshotting and other such SAN > possibilities, but Exchange doesn't support those natively. > And they aren't about to spend the money here for higher end > Backup software like Comm Vault, etc... So, that SAN got me > nothing in added functionality, just a lot of aborted vacations. > > YMMV, but what added functionality are you hoping to get from > the SAN? Are you sure Exchange/OS will actually support it? > And from the other E2K shops I know ... it looks like > Clustering one way or the other ends up reducing your > reliability and up-time. But, if you're own of those Admins > without family or interest in vacations there could be merit > in these options. > > Brent > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Posted At: Friday, December 06, 2002 10:42 AM > Posted To: MS Exchange List > Conversation: the IBM Shark > Subject: RE: the IBM Shark > > > Hehe > > That would be me. :| > > We'll see how it goes. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 11:02 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: the IBM Shark > > You keep thinking your happy thoughts. <g> > > Who is going to be running your SAN? If you find yourself arguing the > difference between spindles and storage space, you're going > to have a grand > old time. > > The architecture for the large SAN vendors was based on the > limitations in > the IBM 3xxx mainframe systems. It was more cost effective to > place large > amounts of cache in the storage system to accommodate its > predictable, read > IO operations. You'll find that the typical answer to any > issue you have > with a large SAN is to throw more hardware at it. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 12:18 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: the IBM Shark > > > :p that could be solved with proper planning and good lun > management. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 9:01 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: the IBM Shark > > You're going to carve up the disks and share spindles with > "critcal" servers > running high intensive databases? <snicker> > > Good luck. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 10:52 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: the IBM Shark > > > We plan on using it for our 17 "critical" servers and to cut > the prices of > all the disk we have. Mostly Windows/SQL, and some AIX and > linux. Out the > door we were going to start with 3tb so the rumor of a 3.36tb > performance > boundary made me a little wary, but I'm not sure if there is > any truth to > it. > > e- > > -----Original Message----- > From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 8:47 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: the IBM Shark > > As DASDI for os390/Zos mainframes they're great. > Not aware of the exact performance boundary. > What do you plan to use them for. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 9:29 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: OT: the IBM Shark > > > Is anyone here happen to be running a IBM shark or possibly a > Hitachi 9900 > series SAN? We are looking at both of these and I have heard > rumors that > the shark has a performance boundary of 3.36 TB. Just curious. > > e- > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
