There's no reason Exchange can't go on a SAN - the only issue is that, at this point, the "point in time" or snapshot backups aren't supported. Therefore, just exclude Exchange from those processes and continue using traditional backup methods.
My personal thought is, in a multiple Exchange server site, to use a "swing" volume on the SAN. Mount the volume to the Exchange box, use NTBackup to backup to a file, then unmount the volume. Lather, rinse, repeat until all servers are backed up, then mount the volume to your backup box (or a file server) and back it up. ------------------------------------------------------ Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA > -----Original Message----- > From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 11:16 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: the IBM Shark > > > Good feedback, thank you. > > Mostly it's a disk cost issue, that's the larger driving > issue. Its going > to happen, I don't really have a big say there. What I do > have a say in is > what should go to san and what shouldn't. Sounds like maybe exchange > shouldn't. > > -----Original Message----- > From: MS Exchange List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 1:35 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: the IBM Shark > > > Hello, > > I can offer 1 data point of E2K on a SAN: > > It worked fine for about a year, but then began failing about > every 3 weeks. > Several of the failures required Disaster Recovery for the > DBs. Strangely > it always happened just before I was going on a vacation, which does > something bad for Quality of Life if you're married, etc... > > Vendor replaced just about every single piece of hardware > over the various > failures. On the last one I DR'd to a JBOD we had laying around and > everything has been fine since. A relaxing Thanksgiving. > > I had great hopes for Snapshotting and other such SAN > possibilities, but > Exchange doesn't support those natively. And they aren't > about to spend the > money here for higher end Backup software like Comm Vault, > etc... So, that > SAN got me nothing in added functionality, just a lot of > aborted vacations. > > YMMV, but what added functionality are you hoping to get from > the SAN? Are > you sure Exchange/OS will actually support it? And from the > other E2K shops > I know ... it looks like Clustering one way or the other ends > up reducing > your reliability and up-time. But, if you're own of those > Admins without > family or interest in vacations there could be merit in these options. > > Brent > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Posted At: Friday, December 06, 2002 10:42 AM > Posted To: MS Exchange List > Conversation: the IBM Shark > Subject: RE: the IBM Shark > > > Hehe > > That would be me. :| > > We'll see how it goes. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 11:02 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: the IBM Shark > > You keep thinking your happy thoughts. <g> > > Who is going to be running your SAN? If you find yourself arguing the > difference between spindles and storage space, you're going > to have a grand > old time. > > The architecture for the large SAN vendors was based on the > limitations in > the IBM 3xxx mainframe systems. It was more cost effective to > place large > amounts of cache in the storage system to accommodate its > predictable, read > IO operations. You'll find that the typical answer to any > issue you have > with a large SAN is to throw more hardware at it. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 12:18 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: the IBM Shark > > > :p that could be solved with proper planning and good lun > management. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 9:01 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: the IBM Shark > > You're going to carve up the disks and share spindles with > "critcal" servers > running high intensive databases? <snicker> > > Good luck. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 10:52 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: the IBM Shark > > > We plan on using it for our 17 "critical" servers and to cut > the prices of > all the disk we have. Mostly Windows/SQL, and some AIX and > linux. Out the > door we were going to start with 3tb so the rumor of a 3.36tb > performance > boundary made me a little wary, but I'm not sure if there is > any truth to > it. > > e- > > -----Original Message----- > From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 8:47 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: the IBM Shark > > As DASDI for os390/Zos mainframes they're great. > Not aware of the exact performance boundary. > What do you plan to use them for. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 9:29 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: OT: the IBM Shark > > > Is anyone here happen to be running a IBM shark or possibly a > Hitachi 9900 > series SAN? We are looking at both of these and I have heard > rumors that > the shark has a performance boundary of 3.36 TB. Just curious. > > e- > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
