Disagree. We are moving all of our servers to the SAN, including booting the OS from the SAN. We were able to show a break even scenario in hard costs, and then the "soft cost" were able to push things over the top.
Largely because of our purchasing habits, I admit. We would buy servers with 100 to 400 GB's of drive space because they (developers and DBA's, not me!) might need it within the three year lease cycle. Then when it came off lease they may have used 15 or 20 GB's. Also, booting from SAN I lose the array card along with all the hard drives. Again just one man's opinion. -----Original Message----- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:15 AM To: NT 2000 Discussions Subject: RE: Basic SAN question IMO, the *right* answer is to not buy a SAN for generalized storage. At the current price-per-mb rates of SAN solutions vs. Direct Attached Storage(DAS), I can waste a LOT of locally attached storage before I break even moving to a SAN. Don't get me wrong - SAN's have their place. I just don't think most companies need them. And don't even get me started on NAS boxes, either. ------------------------------------------------------ Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Levis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:27 AM > To: NT 2000 Discussions > Subject: RE: Basic SAN question > > > Thanks for the warning. > > I do plan on minimizing the number of LUNs, but my boss asked > the question > and I wanted to be sure to have the /right/ answer instead of the > /right-now/ answer. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 7:51 AM > > To: NT 2000 Discussions > > Subject: RE: Basic SAN question > > > > > > Chris, > > > > Most vendors will allow you to slice and dice a SAN array > > into as many LUNs of whatever size you want. Its absolutely > > the wrong thing to do, but it certainly can be done. > > > > Any time a phisical platter is partitioned, you're going to > > take a performance hit - simply put, the heads can't be in > > two places at once, so if two systems are trying to access > > data which is physically on the same platter, but logically > > on different LUNs, there is head contention, and one of the > > two must wait for the other to finish "using" the heads, and > > then pay the additional price of a head seek across the > > platter to its assigned set of cylinders. > > > > In the case of your single 500GB RAID5 set in your SAN being > > split into 300/100/50/50, you have in reality created 4 > > partitions on each spindle, with 60%/20%/10%/10% split on > > each spindle. With a large number of platters, and larger > > stripe sizes, its theoretically possible to reduce the > > chances of contention within the SAN, but realistically > > speaking, chances are there is going to be some contention, > > and therefore some performance hits associated with managing > > your disks this way. > > > > Its one of the lies^H^H^H^H omissions commonly done in the > > sales pitches of the big storage vendors. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE > > Sr. Systems Administrator > > Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity > > Atlanta, GA > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Chris Levis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 2:07 PM > > > To: NT 2000 Discussions > > > Subject: Basic SAN question > > > > > > > > > If you have a RAID-5 array of (let's say) 500GB, can you create > > > LUNs of an arbitrary size to be presented to the servers? E.g, a > > > 300GB, a 100GB, and > > > two 50GB? Or is there a convention that all LUNs have to be > > > a uniform > > > size? > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___________________________ > > > Chris Levis > > > Applied Geographics, Inc. > > > > > > ------ > > > You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% > > > > > > > ------ > > You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% > > > > ------ > You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% > ------ You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are NOT the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the e-mail to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this e-mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. ------ You are subscribed as [email protected] Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
