Oh, and remember how great it was with dedicated servers that you could start upgrades on all subscribers at once? Ya, not really recommended any longer. The upgrade IOPS, etc required during an upgrade jump significantly. Concurrent upgrades would put a tremendous strain on off box storage. I doubt very highly you'd get a storage team to guarantee four x upgrade req's for a concurrent upgrade on four servers.
Sent from my iPhone > On Dec 17, 2014, at 9:34 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi <[email protected]> wrote: > > The one thing that didn't click for me was that all the requirements they > give re: IOPS, etc is per server and is additive. When you give these numbers > to your storage folks, the usual response is that it's difficult to guarantee > those numbers. Any tools that Cisco has only exist on the servers themselves, > so you have to install in order to run the utilities. > > There was an in depth session at Cisco Live this year that went into quite a > bit of detail as to the calculations necessary to come up with the final > values. It convinced me that for the time being, I'm going to be recommending > C series servers with onbox storage. > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Dec 17, 2014, at 7:16 PM, Scott Voll <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I just found this: >> http://docwiki.cisco.com/wiki/UC_Virtualization_Supported_Hardware#Storage >> >> Looks like all the protocols are supported. FCoE, iSCSI, NFS for 3rd party. >> >> >> Anyone running any of this in production and care to put in your two cents? >> >> Scott >> >>> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Scott Voll <[email protected]> wrote: >>> OK planning storage requirements for UC on UCS upgrade from 8.6(physical) >>> to 10.5(vm) >>> >>> we are looking at 2 CM nodes, 1 UC, 1 UCCx, one CER, PLM, PCD, and >>> presence. The way I see it from the VM doc's it looks like I need about 1 >>> TB of storage and roughly 8k IOPS. What Protocols are supported? FCoE? >>> iSCSI? NFS? The only thing I have found thus far is FC. >>> >>> Can anyone confirm that IO and Storage looks reasonable? and let me know >>> which protocol's are TAC supported? >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Scott >> _______________________________________________ >> cisco-voip mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip > _______________________________________________ > cisco-voip mailing list > [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
_______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
