ASB, thanks for clarifying....

Didn't you hear what I MEANT?! :)


Jonathan L. Raper, A+, MCSA, MCSE
Technology Coordinator
Eagle Physicians & Associates, PA
jra...@eaglemds.com<BLOCKED::mailto:%20jra...@eaglemds.com>
www.eaglemds.com<BLOCKED::http://www.eaglemds.com/>

________________________________
From: Andrew S. Baker [mailto:asbz...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 11:01 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: SAN question

Backup AND Recovery.

Trust me, the second one won't work without the first, but the second is done 
poorly, you'll still have lots of grief and pain...



ASB (My XeeSM Profile)<http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker>
Exploiting Technology for Business Advantage...



On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 10:57 AM, Raper, Jonathan - Eagle 
<jra...@eaglemds.com<mailto:jra...@eaglemds.com>> wrote:
+100,000,000

Who cares about your High Availability & redundancy if you don't have a 
*ROCK_SOLID_BACKUP_PLAN*.

You need these books: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/701

Curtis *KNOWS* his stuff, and you (as well as all the rest of us, if we haven't 
already) would benefit from his knowledge and experience on the subject, less 
we experience an RGE... [1]

HTH...

Jonathan L. Raper, A+, MCSA, MCSE
Technology Coordinator
Eagle Physicians & Associates, PA
jra...@eaglemds.com
www.eaglemds.com

[1] Resume Generating Event

________________________________
From: Jeff Steward [mailto:jstew...@gmail.com<mailto:jstew...@gmail.com>]
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 10:49 AM

To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: SAN question

What is your current backup solution?

-Jeff Steward
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 10:21 AM, John Aldrich 
<jaldr...@blueridgecarpet.com<mailto:jaldr...@blueridgecarpet.com>> wrote:
Well, my (admittedly limited) understanding is that at the low-end SANs have
a lot of overlap with NAS and that they are almost interchangeable. I want
some sort of separate machine to get the "file server" role off the DCs.
Maybe that means a NAS, maybe it means  a SAN, maybe it means a server with
DAS running Windows Storage Server. At this point, I'm not really sure what
the best money would be. Whatever we get, I want it to be expandable so that
as we (hopefully) grow, we can add more storage as needed.

I do like the idea of having tape to back up whatever we have. If we're
going to have email in-house, we're likely to end up with at least a couple
terabytes of data in the long run, so whatever archival backup we end up
with is likely to need to be a library, instead of just an on-board tape
drive.



From: Kevin Lundy [mailto:klu...@gmail.com<mailto:klu...@gmail.com>]
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 9:12 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: SAN question

And absolutely none of that requires a SAN.  Especially for your data set
size.

Why do you think you need a SAN?  versus NAS?  versus well architechted DAS
with decent tape?
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 8:37 AM, John Aldrich 
<jaldr...@blueridgecarpet.com<mailto:jaldr...@blueridgecarpet.com>>
wrote:
I want to ensure that the data integrity remains intact, even if it takes a
couple days to recover. This is business-critical data, although we could
live without it for a couple or three days, it would be very difficult and
time consuming to recreate much of the data on the servers. For this reason,
I want redundant disks, network, controllers, etc.
I believe I previously mentioned that my CEO told me we could live with
taking up to 3 or 4 days to recover the data, but after that, it would be
problematic. Personally, I'd like to get it down to under 48 hours to
recover (not 4 business days, 48 actual hours.) That's why I want redundant
controllers or if I can't get redundant controllers on the storage appliance
itself, I want redundant storage appliances, such that the data itself is
redundant.
I would not like to have to go to the CEO and tell him "sorry, we lost the
data because the system crashed and we had no backups." Theoretically, I
could have one "appliance" and a tape library and be good, but I'd prefer to
have it a *little* more robust than that.



-----Original Message-----
From: Steven M. Caesare 
[mailto:scaes...@caesare.com<mailto:scaes...@caesare.com>]
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 12:12 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN question

> set up in some way that there's lots of redundancy

Data redundancy? Disk redundancy? Controller redundancy? Site redundancy?
Link redundancy?...

If the answers to any of the above are "yes", to what degree?

You can go nuts with this stuff... as has been mentioned before, what are
your business requirements driving this architecture?

-sc

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Aldrich 
> [mailto:jaldr...@blueridgecarpet.com<mailto:jaldr...@blueridgecarpet.com>]
> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2010 3:28 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: SAN question
>
> Well, I *would* like to get the storage off the domain controllers and
have it
> set up in some way that there's lots of redundancy. I suppose I could buy
a
> Microsoft Storage Server with a couple terabytes of disk space and use
that.
>
>
>
> From: Bill Humphries 
> [mailto:nt...@hedgedigger.com<mailto:nt...@hedgedigger.com>]
> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2010 3:14 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: SAN question
>
> Yeah, my vote is for DAS. You have a simple network that doesn't have to
be
> complex.  A carpet company isn't some startup or tech company that will
> change radically in a short period of time.  The only way things radically
> change there is if Shaw or Mohawk come knocking at the door...then you
> have different problems.
>
> Bill
>
>
> Jeff Steward wrote:
> I'm bored, I'll bite.
>
> Like others here, I'm not convinced you even need a SAN or even NAS.  You
> can probably make use of DAS.
>
> To even begin to make an attempt to give you more guidance we need:
>
> How many users will be hitting the file server.
> What type of file i/o are we talking about? Have you benchmarked your
> current performance?  How much storage do you currently have and how
> much do you think you will need to meet anticipated growth over the next
24
> to 36 months.
>
> If you move to providing in-house Exchange, how many users will you be
> hosting?  How many are heavy duty users versus light duty?
>
> That's a start, answers to those questions will help us help you further.
>
> -Jeff Steward
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 10:16 AM, John Aldrich
> <jaldr...@blueridgecarpet.com<mailto:jaldr...@blueridgecarpet.com>> wrote:
> Ok, guys. I'm trying to narrow down my many choices with regards to our
on-
> going search for a SAN manufacturer. I'd like your thoughts on the whole
> question of adding more intelligence vs just adding more disks. i.e. the
EQ vs
> LeftHand models.
>
> I can see arguments to be made for both models. I'll tell you that,
initially, the
> SAN is going to be a glorified file server, however, we plan on hosting
our
> email data store on the SAN when we bring email in-house later on. I've
> already verified with the email vendor that I hope to use that this is not
a
> problem, so that's a non-issue. Other than that, the only database we
would
> store on the SAN would possibly be the database from our Vipre install,
> although initially that would stay on the local storage.
>
> So, I'd like to see some discussions of the benefits of just adding a tray
of
> "dumb drives" or adding a complete controller along with the drives (a la
> LeftHand.)
>
> I just don't know enough about the benefits of each model to know what
> would work best for us. I'm hoping that you guys who are more experienced
> would give me the benefit of your knowledge.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> John Aldrich
> IT Manager,
> Blueridge Carpet
> 706-276-2001, Ext. 2233

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to 
listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com<mailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com>
with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin

________________________________
Any medical information contained in this electronic message is CONFIDENTIAL 
and privileged. It is unlawful for unauthorized persons to view, copy, 
disclose, or disseminate CONFIDENTIAL information. This electronic message may 
contain information that is confidential and/or legally privileged. It is 
intended only for the use of the individual(s) and/or entity named as 
recipients in the message. If you are not an intended recipient of this 
message, please notify the sender immediately and delete this material from 
your computer. Do not deliver, distribute or copy this message, and do not 
disclose its contents or take any action in reliance on the information that it 
contains.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin

Reply via email to