Thank you. I will work on getting that information from Management.



-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com] 
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 11:56 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN question

In the interim:
a) talk to management about various scenarios. Have some facts to back up
the scenarios in case they question the likelihood of it happening (e.g. how
many laptop/workstations have you lost - either the whole thing, or just the
disk drive). Ask them how they feel if the CEO's laptop died. Or if no one
could logon. Or the sales people couldn't VPN back in again for 24 hours /
48 hours / 72 hours. Or whatever. Get a feel for their priorities. And how
quickly something becomes a priority the longer the service isn't available
(this will help you draft some SLAs/OLAs - basically agreements on how much
a service should be up).
b) as a follow up to (a) - if they voice any real worry about a particular
scenario, inform them that they are *not* covered for such scenario at the
moment (or partially covered, or fully covered). That may focus their minds
on the need to do something about it sooner rather than later.

Cheers
Ken

-----Original Message-----
From: John Aldrich [mailto:jaldr...@blueridgecarpet.com] 
Sent: Friday, 24 September 2010 11:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN question

Thanks for your honest opinion, Ken. I have come to the conclusion that you
and others are right. I'm going to paraphrase... I know what I know, but I
don't know what I don't know and there are too many unknowns right now. I
think I'm going to shelve this project for now and work on a backup/recovery
solution while working on getting management to cough up the money for a
consultant to help me figure out what I need.




-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 11:39 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN question

I think this thread (like all the previous ones) has gone on long enough.

We are not asking you questions because we want answers. Frankly, I think
most of the people here no longer care - you've used enough time as it is. 

*You* need to work out what your *requirements* are. Not what you're
'unhappy' about. Or what you 'think' you need. You need to find out what the
business needs, in order of priority.

For example you state that you need to be back up and running within 3 days.
OK - a SAN is not going to help with that. Only a *recovery* system can help
with that. That means some way of replacing your tape drive (if you are
worried that you'll lose that), and a way of getting your tapes back, and a
way of restoring. All within 3 days. That's called your RTO: Recovery Time
Objective.

The next thing to consider is your RPO - Recovery Point Objective. How much
data can you afford to lose? One day? Two days? A week? Again *you* need to
figure this out. And again, a SAN will not help you with that.

The only thing a SAN is going to do is help you avoid a recovery scenario.
But you haven't stated *any* requirement whatsoever about this. Is the
business happy to pay $30k to ensure that they only have a disaster once
every 10 years? Or would they prefer to suffer a disaster once every 5
years, but by spending $30k on a tape library, they can be up and running
again in 3 days? This is what *you* need to find out. Then you can work out
what you need to buy.

It doesn't matter how big or small your environment is you need
requirements. My environment is going to be ~4000 Wintel servers in
Production alone, I suspect yours will be smaller unless the carpet business
significantly picks up. Our requirements from the customer and internally
run to many hundreds of pages - probably over a thousand pages now. Even my
home network (where I have about 10 VM servers) has requirements. Otherwise,
you are just going to be either (a) bothering people with questions forever
or (b) p*ssing money up a wall on stuff you don't need.

If you want help documenting what you need, then please ask for help on
that. Please stop asking for advice on SAN vendors until you've worked out
what your requirements are, and you think you've found a good fit and what
other people's experience with that particular piece of kit.

Cheers
Ken 

-----Original Message-----
From: John Aldrich [mailto:jaldr...@blueridgecarpet.com]
Sent: Friday, 24 September 2010 11:26 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN question

We are running DFSR, but only for redundancy. All clients map to a physical
machine and drive, as we had some issues with DFSR not staying synchronous,
even over a GigE connection. This was mainly due to running out of room on
the disk for replication (due to multiple copies of large files being stored
--- since corrected.)




-----Original Message-----
From: greg.swe...@actsconsulting.net [mailto:greg.swe...@actsconsulting.net]

Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 11:06 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN question

Also do you use DFS?  If you do, NAS units don't work.  The volumes must be
mapped to Windows servers as local drives (meaning ISCSI or DAS)

HECK, running two servers with appropriate DAS running DFS/Replication would
give you redundancy..  There are tons of ways to slice this without going to
a SAN and spending that money unless your REQUIREMENTS dictate specific
features that only SANS require.

You can get two cheap Drobo or Synology boxes that support AD, SMB, CIFS,
ISCSI (mini sans basically) 3 to 5 TB depending on raid and size of drives
for 1/3rd the cost of a SAN.  Synology and Drobo do replication between each
other, you could use ISCSI and do DFS replication one to each server for
redundancy, or have one online and replicate to the other for backups.  


-----Original Message-----
From: John Aldrich [mailto:jaldr...@blueridgecarpet.com]
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 10:22 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SAN question

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.



~ 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



~ 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