I bet you do! -----Original Message----- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 9:10 AM To: NT 2000 Discussions Subject: RE: Basic SAN question
Yeah - we do 24x7x365 customer support for our eCommerce network. Kinda hard to down anything sometimes. Oh - the days of 8-5, how I miss them! ------------------------------------------------------ Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA > -----Original Message----- > From: Wes Owen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 10:08 AM > To: NT 2000 Discussions > Subject: RE: Basic SAN question > > > Yep down time is down time fair enough. We are primarily an > 8-5 shop and no > one will ever notice that we take Exchange off-line for a > short period at > 3:00 AM in the morning. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 8:55 AM > To: NT 2000 Discussions > Subject: RE: Basic SAN question > > > That's still downtime, however. Might only be 30 seconds, but that's > downtime. And frankly, it takes more than 30 seconds for Exchange to > sync the database with the in memory cache and the logs. > > This is one area that SANs really still don't have it right, > but part of > that is because Microsoft didn't write Exchange to support > that kind of > backup. They are addressing that in Titanium, I believe, but > its not reality > today. EMC provides an alternate solution, but its not the same. > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE > Sr. Systems Administrator > Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity > Atlanta, GA > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Wes Owen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 9:43 AM > > To: NT 2000 Discussions > > Subject: RE: Basic SAN question > > > > > > It is all about how you handle the split. You can make the split, > > have a second server connect to the BCV, and then do your backup > > from that second > > server. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 8:37 AM > > To: NT 2000 Discussions > > Subject: RE: Basic SAN question > > > > > > That's an offline backup, not an online backup. Online backups walk > > the database itself, page by page, therefore checking the > > underlying structure > > of the database and the contents. > > > > I'm familiar with the process you're describing, and trust me, its > > not the same. Online backups don't require any downtime. > > > > In the database world, I think you'd call it a database dump > > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE > > Sr. Systems Administrator > > Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity > > Atlanta, GA > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Wes Owen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 8:45 AM > > > To: NT 2000 Discussions > > > Subject: RE: Basic SAN question > > > > > > > > > With Exchange 2000 it makes use of MS provided API's. It > > > provides the same > > > backup as if you shut the system down and then made a > backup of it. > > > > > > If you are talking about making a hot back up to another > server yes > > > you can also do that, but it would not be quite as automated. > > There are white > > > papers available to on the Powerlink site on how to do this. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 7:42 AM > > > To: NT 2000 Discussions > > > Subject: RE: Basic SAN question > > > > > > > > > That's not an online backup - that's a snapshot backup, > which isn't > > > the same thing. And is REALLY not what you want to do do Exchange. > > > > > > I'm talking about a backup via the Exchange Backup API. > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE > > > Sr. Systems Administrator > > > Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity > > > Atlanta, GA > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Wes Owen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 8:29 AM > > > > To: NT 2000 Discussions > > > > Subject: RE: Basic SAN question > > > > > > > > > > > > Well let me answer your question for you. Yes you can. > > They have a > > > > windows resource kit that includes Exchange tools to do > > what you are > > > > asking for. > > > > However the Exchange DB will need to be unmounted (not > > > > shutdown) during that > > > > time of the split which could take a few seconds to a couple > > > > of minutes > > > > depending on the size of the DB. > > > > > > > > Notice this is only during the split, not while it is > syncing up. > > > > > > > > They should have scripts available for you or be able to > > > make some to > > > > automate all or part of this process. > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 6:45 AM > > > > To: NT 2000 Discussions > > > > Subject: RE: Basic SAN question > > > > > > > > > > > > I guess I'm fortunate enough to work in an environment in > > which the > > > > managers manage and they pay myself and the other > > engineers here to > > > > be the subject > > > > matter experts on things, and undertake financial decisions > > > as a team. > > > > > > > > The discussions I've had with EMC engineers have generally > > > ended up as > > > > "stump the engineer" type questions - there are a few > > > things I'd like > > > > to be able to do but no one can tell me that it can be done. For > > > > instance - when running multiple Exchange[1] servers, create a > > > > roving LUN that mounts to the server, then backup Exchange to > > > > disk, then disconnect, > > > lather, rinse, > > > > repeat. You get rocking fast direct to disk backups, > then connect > > > > the rover directly to the backup box and rip to tape. > > > > > > > > Roger > > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE > > > > Sr. Systems Administrator > > > > Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity > > > > Atlanta, GA > > > > > > > > [1] Could just as easily be any database > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Shea, Linchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 5:45 PM > > > > > To: NT 2000 Discussions > > > > > Subject: RE: Basic SAN question > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree with you Roger. But the management may think > otherwise. > > > > > > > > > > Linchi > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:15 PM > > > > > > 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%% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------ > > > > > 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.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%% > > > > ------ > > 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%% ------ You are subscribed as [email protected] Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
