Storage capacity is a major factor here. For small disk sizes, there is
considerable value in SSDs.
It becomes less of a no-brainer as you move up in size. At least for now.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-Original Message-
From: Sean Martin
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 16:26
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Brian Desmond wrote:
> Hi-
>
> I'm not entirely certain I understand the question, but, some general
> thoughts around your message:
>
> You are correct your proposed methodology this is the easiest method.
>
> You will also need to run adprep /domainprep followe
Don't make me pull the prior art lever...
Put down the trademarked words and nobody gets hurt.
-ASB: http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 8:31 PM, Andrew Levicki wrote:
> Indeed®™!
>
> 2009/10/18 Sean Martin
>
> I dont think that's necessarily true. If you were to do a cost-be
Indeed®™!
2009/10/18 Sean Martin
> I dont think that's necessarily true. If you were to do a cost-benefit
> analysis between traditional 15k drives and SSDs (or EFDs), you might be
> surprised what you find.
>
> Take an Exchange server that experiences an incredible amount of read IO at
> the in
I dont think that's necessarily true. If you were to do a cost-benefit
analysis between traditional 15k drives and SSDs (or EFDs), you might
be surprised what you find.
Take an Exchange server that experiences an incredible amount of read
IO at the information store. You might need 10 tradit
You forget your Copyright and Trademark symbols after Indeed.
Webster
From: asbz...@gmail.com [mailto:asbz...@gmail.com]
Subject: Re: "Why RAID 5 stops working in 2009 | Storage Bits | ZDNet.com"
Indeed.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
_
From: "Martin Blacksto
Indeed.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-Original Message-
From: "Martin Blackstone"
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 16:18:45
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: "Why RAID 5 stops working in 2009 | Storage Bits | ZDNet.com"
Not yet. The write speed of SSD’s still isn’t that good.
We need prices to fall significantly to reap the benefits of the sizes we need.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-Original Message-
From: Andrew Levicki
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 19:12:41
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: "Why RAID 5 stops working in 2009 | Storage Bits | ZD
I'll have to try both of these.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-Original Message-
From: "Angus Scott-Fleming"
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 10:16:12
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Reader 9.2 Update Hell
On 15 Oct 2009 at 17:23, Andrew S. Baker wrote:
> Not only is Foxit
Thanks, Brian. Some really good points...
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-Original Message-
From: Brian Desmond
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 16:26:00
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Outsourcing Discussion
A couple thoughts inline.
Thanks,
Brian Desmond
br...@briandesmond.
Not yet. The write speed of SSDs still isnt that good. Its on reads that
its great.
They still have high failure rates and cost is still extravagant.
They are great in places like banks and stock brokers who read data and 1
second can cost a million bucks.
Companies like EMC and NetApp
In my opinion, we're on the cusp of seeing solid state storage becoming the
norm and we will be able to put hard drives out to pasture or use them more
for backups than tapes.
Although we have much faster hard disks nowadays than ever, it's amazing
that we are still at the behest of such a mechanic
Remember that with SBS you should split your data on drives based on how you
will restore them. If you're aiming to have 2 x mirrored pairs then splitting
Exchange over both drives will give better performance. Also sharepoint and any
other SQL instances will bottleneck so it all depends on the
Scaremongering, or legitimate things to worry about? Lots of the "Talkback"
comments are that ZDNet is over the top these days, but it seems to me he's got
some legitimate points.
--- Included Stuff Follows ---
Why RAID 5 stops working in 2009 | Storage Bits | ZDNet.com
Disks fail
Good point.
Keeping the old re-lettered E: partition around, though perhaps
smaller to allow for a larger C: partition, is a pretty good idea.
Kurt
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 10:12, John Cook wrote:
> I wouldn't put the Exchange logs on the C: , if something goes awry with the
> backup not deleti
On 16 Oct 2009 at 10:08, Sam Cayze wrote:
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?displaylang=en&FamilyID=ee2a
> 1d38-88a9-43b3-95bc-7e962f0b6030
Amusing kick-in-Microsoft's-pants fact of the day: it's a .PDF ...
I think this is the first .PDF I've seem from microsoft.com/downloads.
On 15 Oct 2009 at 17:23, Andrew S. Baker wrote:
> Not only is Foxit getting a little hefty, but it sometimes behaves a
> little weird in FireFox under 64-bit Windows. And the last update had
> some problem with printing from FireFox.
I always disable "View PDF in browser" so that the PDFs open
I wouldn't put the Exchange logs on the C: , if something goes awry with the
backup not deleting them you could run out of disc space for the OS and make
the whole machine unbootable. BTDT
John W. Cook
Systems Administrator
Partnership For Strong Families
Sent to you from my Blackberry in the Cl
What data lives on the E: drive currently? The answer to that is kinda
crucial to my proposal.
I would, myself, do the following, which is close to what you are
considering, but a bit simpler - you might not even have to reboot
with this procedure after installing the new disks and letting the
RAI
There is no explicit policy yet, (and I've been pushing for one for 8
years!) but I've been assuming that 7 years for our financial and
engineering data (document control, etc.), though possibly longer on
some of the engineering stuff - we have products in the field that we
are called upon to repai
Exactly!
-Original Message-
From: Brian Desmond [mailto:br...@briandesmond.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 9:26 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Anyone here migrated away from TSM?
VTLs get you disk to disk with an tools that doesn't do disk to disk (as they
expose hard
The per port charge however is the de facto standard. If you as the customer
tried to do the MAC billing, unless it was a deal breaker the vendor would push
back HARD. They would need new tooling to manage and bill that which costs a
lot to develop relatively speaking.
Thanks,
Brian Desmond
br.
The one scenario where typically servers move out of the country is in a deal
where part of it is datacenter consolidation. You move all your servers to
vendor owned datacenters, typically one per region (Asia, Europe, Americas).
Unless you have regulatory issues with the data leaving, those ser
Costs are significantly less. Think 50% or more reduction depending on location
of your people and theirs, overhead, scope, etc.
Thanks,
Brian Desmond
br...@briandesmond.com
c - 312.731.3132
-Original Message-
From: Bryan Garmon [mailto:bryan.gar...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 13
You can tell a lot about the PSS queues by whether the guy has an email address
that starts with v- and a number. Plus their emails are from a subdomain of
Microsoft.com IIRC.
Where that HP queue is that you're calling into makes a HUGE difference. If
StorageWorks is down in Houston or Fort Col
Definitely. The big vendors all have services where you can dispatch field
service to a location within some agreed upon window. The scope ranges from
power cycle to hardware level breakfix, popping the CD in, etc.
Thanks,
Brian Desmond
br...@briandesmond.com
c - 312.731.3132
From: Sean Martin
Hi-
I'm not entirely certain I understand the question, but, some general thoughts
around your message:
You are correct your proposed methodology this is the easiest method.
You will also need to run adprep /domainprep followed by adprep /domainprep
/gpprep for each domain you plan to upgrade.
80% of the calls you can successfully send elsewhere as you can write the flow
chart for it. 20% require actual troubleshooting, planning, analysis, etc.
These are the ones that trip people up as they get stuck in ratholes in far
away places. One of the ways to find these real quickly is to go i
A couple thoughts inline.
Thanks,
Brian Desmond
br...@briandesmond.com
c - 312.731.3132
From: Andrew S. Baker [mailto:asbz...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 9:49 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Outsourcing Discussion
Congrats, Sherry. :)
Let me attempt to provide you
VTLs get you disk to disk with an tools that doesn't do disk to disk (as they
expose hard drive space as tapes to the backup tool). You can get tools that
will natively do the disk to disk.
Thanks,
Brian Desmond
br...@briandesmond.com
c - 312.731.3132
-Original Message-
From: Kurt Buf
In an operation of this scale you're going to have people who basically live in
the datacenters, "hands & eyes" support as it's often called. Their jobs range
from just going to aisle/rack/position A/B/C and power cycling a box to rack
and stack, etc. Some facilities 24x7, some 8x5, some "lights
Sherry-
Find some thoughts inline. I used to manage (and sell) large scale IT
outsourcing for one of the big outsourcers as well as oversee offshore delivery
teams.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Brian Desmond
br...@briandesmond.com
c - 312.731.3132
From: Sherry Abercrombie [
What's your retention window on the long term storage?
Thanks,
Brian Desmond
br...@briandesmond.com
c - 312.731.3132
-Original Message-
From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 12:51 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Anyone here migrated awa
You're booking pro cases with Microsoft - they're outsourced in India
unfortunately. I likewise won't ever call into those queues anymore.
The call router you describe is actually a normal part of running a large scale
support operation. When you support 100 things, someone has to direct you to
Plug "panther log sysprep" into google and you'll find the right log. On a
plane so I can't look it up.
Thanks,
Brian Desmond
br...@briandesmond.com
c - 312.731.3132
From: Klint Price [mailto:kpr...@arizonaitpro.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 3:41 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject:
Hi Gavin,
Can I ask you whether you need to extend the C: partition to occupy the
whole space? Is the 20GB currently allocated not enough?
Also, if the mirrors are hardware-based, do you know for a fact that you can
extend arrays like that in a non-destructive way, i.e., that won't destroy
your op
Hi,
I just want to run this past you guys to make sure that what i want to do
today is clear in my head and I havent forgotton anyhting.
I have a SBS2003 server that has a hardwared mirrored drive on it.
The drive is split into a 20GB partition (c:) for the system to live on and
a 50GB partition
37 matches
Mail list logo
