I would be interested in anyone doing this or thinking about doing this in
an EMC storage environment.
Just attended a 1/2 seminar by EMC where they espoused virtual disks that
could/would expand when needed.

One thing shown was disturbing (to me at least).
They said MS was targeting 25GB mailboxes in 3 years (effort to keep up with
Google).
Comments?

Thx in advance

On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Michael B. Smith <mich...@smithcons.com>wrote:

> Note: I am not recommending you go against published guidance from MSFT.
>
>
>
> That being said – that recommendation is primarily against the original
> Hyper-V. VHDs created by the original version of Hyper-V, or disks that have
> been upgraded from Virtual Server or Virtual PC, expand quite slowly.
>
>
>
> Disks that are created by Hyper-V R2 are only a couple of percentage points
> slower than fixed size VHDs. Negligible.
>
>
>
> I know a number of companies that are running Hyper-V R2 installations with
> variable disks. So far, at least, it hasn’t been an issue.
>
>
>
> I don’t know how (or even if) this impacts VMware or XenServer.
>
>
>
> So….to tie this back to your question, if the storage virtualization causes
> Exchange to notice whenever the disk expands, it’s not a good fit.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Michael B. Smith
>
> Consultant and Exchange MVP
>
> http://TheEssentialExchange.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Sobey, Richard A [mailto:r.so...@imperial.ac.uk]
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 22, 2010 6:35 AM
>
> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Guidance on disks for Exchange 2010
>
>
>
> In the virtualisation guide for Exchange 2010, in the section on storage
> this is written:
>
>
>
> *Virtual disks that dynamically expand aren't supported by Exchange.*
>
>
>
> Does anyone know if this also applies to a disk presented to a physical
> server via some form of storage virtualisation appliance? Said disk would be
> presented as 100GB, for example, and the OS would see 100GB, but would grow
> to reach this size at the storage level.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Richard
>
>
>



-- 
smsadm

Reply via email to