RE: Exchange and SAN
argh
-Original Message-
From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 22 September 2003 20:58
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN
Hey, they use the same letters, so they have to be the same
thing, right?
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.
-Original Message-
From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 20, 2003 4:52 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN
My biggest problem is the amount of jerk-off sellers.
We asked for
i) a san
ii) some direct-attatched external storage
The amount of vendors who took those comments on board, asked
what we wanted them for, and then promptly quoted for a NAS
device was quite depressing. Idiots.
-Original Message-
From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri 19/09/2003 20:52
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc:
Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN
I'll kindly ask you to get off of my soapbox.
My favorite one I've heard lately: Well, it uses fiber
to attach to the SAN
so it's much faster for Exchange.
-Original Message-
From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 2:50 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN
As long as you don't buy into the great white lie of
SAN's, you're golden.
That lie is that there's no performance hit created by
taking a single large
array and carving it into a bunch of LUNs - there's a
physics issue there.
Other than that, its just a bunch of disks, just like
the SCSI attached ones
you probably have now.
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.
-Original Message-
From: Rosales, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 12:17 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Exchange and SAN
Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues
with it? I've
always had a raid array attached to it which could be the
same thing but did
not know if there were any major differences? Any help would
be appreciate
it.
Thanks,
Mario
**
*
The contents of this communication are intended only for the
addressee and
may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you
are not the
intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or
disclose this
communication and notify the sender. Opinions,
conclusions and other
information in this communication that do not relate
to the official
business of my company shall be understood as neither given
nor endorsed by
it.
**
*
_
List posting FAQ:
http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web
Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget
ext_mode=lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
List posting FAQ:
http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget
ext_mode=lang
=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang
=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
.+--xm ,)r( \y'i)l+-rrW{jxm^zx%S ^jZ 2G(L\xfyb))
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL
PROTECTED])j¹%Ë\¢oâùr®+)éíz·±r§ë^ÆuéZ§X¬
:.±Êâm[hæ¯yì\
©àz[,Ã)ärÅÈZËZvh§+-iÌ2G(
RE: Exchange and SAN
Actually, there's enough redundancy even in the smaller scale SANS that you're not at significant risk for that. Shortly after the install of our SAN, we had an issue with one of the storage processors (think of it as a RAID controller within the SAN). It was hot swapped, during the day, without any downtime, and didn't significantly impact the 3 boxes connected at that time. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Dean Cunningham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 6:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN I can't get past the concept that if the SAN dies (ie FC card or Power Supplies) then all teh servers you have attached to it are dead in the water. Sounds like a quasi mainframe to me. I still prefer many eggs and many baskets and take the disk hit. Mind you I would be interested in SAN technology just to put the tape drives external to the server room (like a few miles away via fibre) cheers Dean [EMAIL PROTECTED] 20/09/2003 7:52:42 a.m. I'll kindly ask you to get off of my soapbox. My favorite one I've heard lately: Well, it uses fiber to attach to the SAN so it's much faster for Exchange. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 2:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN As long as you don't buy into the great white lie of SAN's, you're golden. That lie is that there's no performance hit created by taking a single large array and carving it into a bunch of LUNs - there's a physics issue there. Other than that, its just a bunch of disks, just like the SCSI attached ones you probably have now. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Rosales, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 12:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange and SAN Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues with it? I've always had a raid array attached to it which could be the same thing but did not know if there were any major differences? Any help would be appreciate it. Thanks, Mario ** * The contents of this communication are intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication and notify the sender. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this communication that do not relate to the official business of my company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. ** * _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** Northland State of the Environment Report 2002 now online at www.nrc.govt.nz ** NORTHLAND REGIONAL COUNCIL This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL
RE: Exchange and SAN
For our customer we had a controller on their SAN go down, but the redundant controller picked up the slack until the problem controller could be swapped out. The downtime was limited to 20 minutes for one Exchange server (there are five for the site involved). Nate Couch EDS Messaging -- From: Roger Seielstad Reply To: Exchange Discussions Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 7:35 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN Actually, there's enough redundancy even in the smaller scale SANS that you're not at significant risk for that. Shortly after the install of our SAN, we had an issue with one of the storage processors (think of it as a RAID controller within the SAN). It was hot swapped, during the day, without any downtime, and didn't significantly impact the 3 boxes connected at that time. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Dean Cunningham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 6:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN I can't get past the concept that if the SAN dies (ie FC card or Power Supplies) then all teh servers you have attached to it are dead in the water. Sounds like a quasi mainframe to me. I still prefer many eggs and many baskets and take the disk hit. Mind you I would be interested in SAN technology just to put the tape drives external to the server room (like a few miles away via fibre) cheers Dean [EMAIL PROTECTED] 20/09/2003 7:52:42 a.m. I'll kindly ask you to get off of my soapbox. My favorite one I've heard lately: Well, it uses fiber to attach to the SAN so it's much faster for Exchange. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 2:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN As long as you don't buy into the great white lie of SAN's, you're golden. That lie is that there's no performance hit created by taking a single large array and carving it into a bunch of LUNs - there's a physics issue there. Other than that, its just a bunch of disks, just like the SCSI attached ones you probably have now. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Rosales, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 12:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange and SAN Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues with it? I've always had a raid array attached to it which could be the same thing but did not know if there were any major differences? Any help would be appreciate it. Thanks, Mario ** * The contents of this communication are intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication and notify the sender. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this communication that do not relate to the official business of my company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. ** * _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=la ng =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** Northland State of the Environment Report 2002 now online at www.nrc.govt.nz ** NORTHLAND REGIONAL
RE: Exchange and SAN
Just to add my 2 bits We moved our Exchange 5.5 running on win2k from direct attached disk raid 5 to a IBM ESS 2105 Shark, and we saw about 300 to 400% performance increase. -Original Message- From: Rosales, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 10:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN Clarification Windows 2000 and Exchange 5.5 -Original Message- From: Rosales, Mario Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 11:17 AM To: 'Exchange Discussions' Subject: Exchange and SAN Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues with it? I've always had a raid array attached to it which could be the same thing but did not know if there were any major differences? Any help would be appreciate it. Thanks, Mario *** The contents of this communication are intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication and notify the sender. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this communication that do not relate to the official business of my company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. *** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange and SAN
Yeah but that's not necessarily because it was a SAN. If you double the number of disks the databases are on for example your going to see a performance increase, whether it's DAS or SAN. Steve Evans SDSU Foundation -Original Message- From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 6:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN Just to add my 2 bits We moved our Exchange 5.5 running on win2k from direct attached disk raid 5 to a IBM ESS 2105 Shark, and we saw about 300 to 400% performance increase. -Original Message- From: Rosales, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 10:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN Clarification Windows 2000 and Exchange 5.5 -Original Message- From: Rosales, Mario Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 11:17 AM To: 'Exchange Discussions' Subject: Exchange and SAN Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues with it? I've always had a raid array attached to it which could be the same thing but did not know if there were any major differences? Any help would be appreciate it. Thanks, Mario *** The contents of this communication are intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication and notify the sender. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this communication that do not relate to the official business of my company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. *** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange and SAN
Use redundant fiber channel cards and something like EMC PowerPath software. Sincerely, Andrey Fyodorov Systems Engineer Messaging and Collaboration Spherion -Original Message- From: Dean Cunningham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 6:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN I can't get past the concept that if the SAN dies (ie FC card or Power Supplies) then all teh servers you have attached to it are dead in the water. Sounds like a quasi mainframe to me. I still prefer many eggs and many baskets and take the disk hit. Mind you I would be interested in SAN technology just to put the tape drives external to the server room (like a few miles away via fibre) cheers Dean [EMAIL PROTECTED] 20/09/2003 7:52:42 a.m. I'll kindly ask you to get off of my soapbox. My favorite one I've heard lately: Well, it uses fiber to attach to the SAN so it's much faster for Exchange. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 2:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN As long as you don't buy into the great white lie of SAN's, you're golden. That lie is that there's no performance hit created by taking a single large array and carving it into a bunch of LUNs - there's a physics issue there. Other than that, its just a bunch of disks, just like the SCSI attached ones you probably have now. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Rosales, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 12:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange and SAN Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues with it? I've always had a raid array attached to it which could be the same thing but did not know if there were any major differences? Any help would be appreciate it. Thanks, Mario ** * The contents of this communication are intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication and notify the sender. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this communication that do not relate to the official business of my company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. ** * _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** Northland State of the Environment Report 2002 now online at www.nrc.govt.nz ** NORTHLAND REGIONAL COUNCIL This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange and SAN
That's not entirely true. There is a decreasing rate of return from the number of spindles, as the overhead exceeds the benefits. I'd wager the increase was as much from caching, disk speed and controller throughput as anything else. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Steve Evans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 10:53 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN Yeah but that's not necessarily because it was a SAN. If you double the number of disks the databases are on for example your going to see a performance increase, whether it's DAS or SAN. Steve Evans SDSU Foundation -Original Message- From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 6:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN Just to add my 2 bits We moved our Exchange 5.5 running on win2k from direct attached disk raid 5 to a IBM ESS 2105 Shark, and we saw about 300 to 400% performance increase. -Original Message- From: Rosales, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 10:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN Clarification Windows 2000 and Exchange 5.5 -Original Message- From: Rosales, Mario Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 11:17 AM To: 'Exchange Discussions' Subject: Exchange and SAN Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues with it? I've always had a raid array attached to it which could be the same thing but did not know if there were any major differences? Any help would be appreciate it. Thanks, Mario ** ** *** The contents of this communication are intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication and notify the sender. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this communication that do not relate to the official business of my company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. ** ** *** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode= lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange and SAN
Dan, Hey, you run a tight ship then (65GB / 16,000+ mailboxes) ;-) Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everyone wants one but not yours -Original Message- From: Daniel Foerst [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 20 September 2003 05:43 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Exchange and SAN I run 2 Exchange 2000 Enterprise servers on an HP EVA2 SAN. Each server has a 65GB IS right now and a 2GB Public IS. 16,000+ mailboxes total. I have seen no issues since migrating from our 5.5 environment 1 month ago to 2000 and moving away from direct attached SCSI disk environment. The big difference I have notice is that backups are faster because our Tape Unit is attached to the SAN as well and can be shared by both servers. -dan foerst _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited without the express permission of the sender. The views expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of Sony or Sony affiliated companies. Sony email is for business use only. This email and any response may be monitored by Sony United Kingdom Limited. (05) ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange and SAN
Hey, they use the same letters, so they have to be the same thing, right?
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.
-Original Message-
From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 20, 2003 4:52 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN
My biggest problem is the amount of jerk-off sellers.
We asked for
i) a san
ii) some direct-attatched external storage
The amount of vendors who took those comments on board, asked
what we wanted them for, and then promptly quoted for a NAS
device was quite depressing. Idiots.
-Original Message-
From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri 19/09/2003 20:52
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc:
Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN
I'll kindly ask you to get off of my soapbox.
My favorite one I've heard lately: Well, it uses fiber
to attach to the SAN
so it's much faster for Exchange.
-Original Message-
From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 2:50 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN
As long as you don't buy into the great white lie of
SAN's, you're golden.
That lie is that there's no performance hit created by
taking a single large
array and carving it into a bunch of LUNs - there's a
physics issue there.
Other than that, its just a bunch of disks, just like
the SCSI attached ones
you probably have now.
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.
-Original Message-
From: Rosales, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 12:17 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Exchange and SAN
Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues
with it? I've
always had a raid array attached to it which could be the
same thing but did
not know if there were any major differences? Any help would
be appreciate
it.
Thanks,
Mario
**
*
The contents of this communication are intended only for the
addressee and
may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you
are not the
intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or
disclose this
communication and notify the sender. Opinions,
conclusions and other
information in this communication that do not relate
to the official
business of my company shall be understood as neither given
nor endorsed by
it.
**
*
_
List posting FAQ:
http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web
Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget
ext_mode=lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
List posting FAQ:
http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang
=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang
=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
.+--xm ,)r( \y'i)l+-rrW{jxm^zx%S ^jZ 2G(L\xfyb))
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange and SAN
I can't get past the concept that if the SAN dies (ie FC card or Power Supplies) then all teh servers you have attached to it are dead in the water. Sounds like a quasi mainframe to me. I still prefer many eggs and many baskets and take the disk hit. Mind you I would be interested in SAN technology just to put the tape drives external to the server room (like a few miles away via fibre) cheers Dean [EMAIL PROTECTED] 20/09/2003 7:52:42 a.m. I'll kindly ask you to get off of my soapbox. My favorite one I've heard lately: Well, it uses fiber to attach to the SAN so it's much faster for Exchange. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 2:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN As long as you don't buy into the great white lie of SAN's, you're golden. That lie is that there's no performance hit created by taking a single large array and carving it into a bunch of LUNs - there's a physics issue there. Other than that, its just a bunch of disks, just like the SCSI attached ones you probably have now. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Rosales, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 12:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange and SAN Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues with it? I've always had a raid array attached to it which could be the same thing but did not know if there were any major differences? Any help would be appreciate it. Thanks, Mario ** * The contents of this communication are intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication and notify the sender. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this communication that do not relate to the official business of my company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. ** * _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** Northland State of the Environment Report 2002 now online at www.nrc.govt.nz ** NORTHLAND REGIONAL COUNCIL This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange and SAN
Mark Twain said: Put all your eggs in one basket, and watch that basket. Seriously though if you have good SAN hardware, the uptime on that equipment is amazing. You have to remember that everything is redundant. Steve Evans SDSU Foundation -Original Message- From: Dean Cunningham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 3:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN I can't get past the concept that if the SAN dies (ie FC card or Power Supplies) then all teh servers you have attached to it are dead in the water. Sounds like a quasi mainframe to me. I still prefer many eggs and many baskets and take the disk hit. Mind you I would be interested in SAN technology just to put the tape drives external to the server room (like a few miles away via fibre) cheers Dean [EMAIL PROTECTED] 20/09/2003 7:52:42 a.m. I'll kindly ask you to get off of my soapbox. My favorite one I've heard lately: Well, it uses fiber to attach to the SAN so it's much faster for Exchange. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 2:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN As long as you don't buy into the great white lie of SAN's, you're golden. That lie is that there's no performance hit created by taking a single large array and carving it into a bunch of LUNs - there's a physics issue there. Other than that, its just a bunch of disks, just like the SCSI attached ones you probably have now. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Rosales, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 12:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange and SAN Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues with it? I've always had a raid array attached to it which could be the same thing but did not know if there were any major differences? Any help would be appreciate it. Thanks, Mario ** * The contents of this communication are intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication and notify the sender. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this communication that do not relate to the official business of my company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. ** * _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** Northland State of the Environment Report 2002 now online at www.nrc.govt.nz ** NORTHLAND REGIONAL COUNCIL This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange and SAN
My biggest problem is the amount of jerk-off sellers.
We asked for
i) a san
ii) some direct-attatched external storage
The amount of vendors who took those comments on board, asked what we wanted them for,
and then promptly quoted for a NAS device was quite depressing. Idiots.
-Original Message-
From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri 19/09/2003 20:52
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc:
Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN
I'll kindly ask you to get off of my soapbox.
My favorite one I've heard lately: Well, it uses fiber to attach to the SAN
so it's much faster for Exchange.
-Original Message-
From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 2:50 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN
As long as you don't buy into the great white lie of SAN's, you're golden.
That lie is that there's no performance hit created by taking a single large
array and carving it into a bunch of LUNs - there's a physics issue there.
Other than that, its just a bunch of disks, just like the SCSI attached ones
you probably have now.
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.
-Original Message-
From: Rosales, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 12:17 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Exchange and SAN
Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues
with it? I've
always had a raid array attached to it which could be the
same thing but did
not know if there were any major differences? Any help would
be appreciate
it.
Thanks,
Mario
**
*
The contents of this communication are intended only for the
addressee and
may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you
are not the
intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this
communication and notify the sender. Opinions, conclusions and other
information in this communication that do not relate to the official
business of my company shall be understood as neither given
nor endorsed by
it.
**
*
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget
ext_mode=lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang
=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
â²Úh²PÛiÿü0ÂÌÇ(ú«qïÞÅÈ_j¨mg{^özm§ÿâÊZ®Ib²×(÷
¸§þ\«Êez{^ì\
©àz¶j zV§éà+!N§²æìr¸zf¢Ú%y«Þ{!jx Ë0Êy ¢a1r§ââ²)åËZvh§³
§Ê
RE: Exchange and SAN
Clarification Windows 2000 and Exchange 5.5 -Original Message- From: Rosales, Mario Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 11:17 AM To: 'Exchange Discussions' Subject: Exchange and SAN Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues with it? I've always had a raid array attached to it which could be the same thing but did not know if there were any major differences? Any help would be appreciate it. Thanks, Mario *** The contents of this communication are intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication and notify the sender. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this communication that do not relate to the official business of my company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. *** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange and SAN
We run Exchange 5.5 on a HP SAN with our own DR solution. This is signed off by Microsoft PSS. I believe MS support Exchange on a SAN but not a NAS. Regards, Paul -Original Message- From: Rosales, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 19 September 2003 17:19 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN Clarification Windows 2000 and Exchange 5.5 -Original Message- From: Rosales, Mario Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 11:17 AM To: 'Exchange Discussions' Subject: Exchange and SAN Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues with it? I've always had a raid array attached to it which could be the same thing but did not know if there were any major differences? Any help would be appreciate it. Thanks, Mario *** The contents of this communication are intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication and notify the sender. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this communication that do not relate to the official business of my company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. *** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- If you have received this e-mail in error or wish to read our e-mail disclaimer statement and monitoring policy, please refer to http://www.drkw.com/disc/email/ or contact the sender. -- _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange and SAN
We have an exchange 2k server with 800 users, roughly 71 gb private store running on an HP MSA1000 and it works great. I would even venture to say that it runs better than it did on the local drives. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rosales, Mario Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 12:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues with it? I've always had a raid array attached to it which could be the same thing but did not know if there were any major differences? Any help would be appreciate it. Thanks, Mario *** The contents of this communication are intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication and notify the sender. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this communication that do not relate to the official business of my company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. *** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange and SAN
We run Exchange 5.5 on an IBM SAN, no issues here. But you might want to make sure that you have the right hardware behind it or performance will suffer. Paulie -Original Message- From: Rosales, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 12:19 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN Clarification Windows 2000 and Exchange 5.5 -Original Message- From: Rosales, Mario Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 11:17 AM To: 'Exchange Discussions' Subject: Exchange and SAN Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues with it? I've always had a raid array attached to it which could be the same thing but did not know if there were any major differences? Any help would be appreciate it. Thanks, Mario *** The contents of this communication are intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication and notify the sender. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this communication that do not relate to the official business of my company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. *** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange and SAN
I have run into this in a couple of situations. One where we had a cluster communicating to a SAN and the other where we had a single member server talking to a SAN. In both cases I have seen network communications problems result in the IS shutting down because the SA can't talk to it. In the cluster environment the Cluster Server restarts the service just fine after about 5 minutes. In the single server environment I have seen this occur as well. However, I have also seen where the SAN (Network Appliance) corrupted the file because there was a backup going on at the same time the snapshot was being taken. In this case we simply do a snapshot restore and we are back up in about 15-20 minutes. In this case we adjusted the backup job to start well after the snapshot was taken and haven't had any problems since. I hope this helps. Nate Couch EDS Messaging -- From: Rosales, Mario Reply To: Exchange Discussions Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 11:16 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange and SAN Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues with it? I've always had a raid array attached to it which could be the same thing but did not know if there were any major differences? Any help would be appreciate it. Thanks, Mario ** * The contents of this communication are intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication and notify the sender. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this communication that do not relate to the official business of my company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. ** * _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=la ng=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange and SAN
As long as you don't buy into the great white lie of SAN's, you're golden. That lie is that there's no performance hit created by taking a single large array and carving it into a bunch of LUNs - there's a physics issue there. Other than that, its just a bunch of disks, just like the SCSI attached ones you probably have now. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Rosales, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 12:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange and SAN Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues with it? I've always had a raid array attached to it which could be the same thing but did not know if there were any major differences? Any help would be appreciate it. Thanks, Mario ** * The contents of this communication are intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication and notify the sender. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this communication that do not relate to the official business of my company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. ** * _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange and SAN
I thought NetApp only made NAS boxes, not SANs. Oh, yeah - snapshots don't work, but a local backup to disk (with NTBackup) would most likely smoke. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Couch, Nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 12:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN I have run into this in a couple of situations. One where we had a cluster communicating to a SAN and the other where we had a single member server talking to a SAN. In both cases I have seen network communications problems result in the IS shutting down because the SA can't talk to it. In the cluster environment the Cluster Server restarts the service just fine after about 5 minutes. In the single server environment I have seen this occur as well. However, I have also seen where the SAN (Network Appliance) corrupted the file because there was a backup going on at the same time the snapshot was being taken. In this case we simply do a snapshot restore and we are back up in about 15-20 minutes. In this case we adjusted the backup job to start well after the snapshot was taken and haven't had any problems since. I hope this helps. Nate Couch EDS Messaging -- From: Rosales, Mario Reply To: Exchange Discussions Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 11:16 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject:Exchange and SAN Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues with it? I've always had a raid array attached to it which could be the same thing but did not know if there were any major differences? Any help would be appreciate it. Thanks, Mario ** * The contents of this communication are intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication and notify the sender. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this communication that do not relate to the official business of my company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. ** * _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=la ng=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange and SAN
Anything newer than a F840 is a NAS/SAN. It's a traditional NAS and you can have block level access to a LUN via FC, just like a traditonal SAN. It would be like taking an EMC and sticking a Ethernet NIC on it. Also anything newer than the 800 series gives you iSCSI for free. It will be interesting to see how quickly Exchange and iSCSI come along. Steve Evans SDSU Foundation -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 11:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN I thought NetApp only made NAS boxes, not SANs. Oh, yeah - snapshots don't work, but a local backup to disk (with NTBackup) would most likely smoke. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Couch, Nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 12:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN I have run into this in a couple of situations. One where we had a cluster communicating to a SAN and the other where we had a single member server talking to a SAN. In both cases I have seen network communications problems result in the IS shutting down because the SA can't talk to it. In the cluster environment the Cluster Server restarts the service just fine after about 5 minutes. In the single server environment I have seen this occur as well. However, I have also seen where the SAN (Network Appliance) corrupted the file because there was a backup going on at the same time the snapshot was being taken. In this case we simply do a snapshot restore and we are back up in about 15-20 minutes. In this case we adjusted the backup job to start well after the snapshot was taken and haven't had any problems since. I hope this helps. Nate Couch EDS Messaging -- From: Rosales, Mario Reply To: Exchange Discussions Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 11:16 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject:Exchange and SAN Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues with it? I've always had a raid array attached to it which could be the same thing but did not know if there were any major differences? Any help would be appreciate it. Thanks, Mario ** * The contents of this communication are intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication and notify the sender. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this communication that do not relate to the official business of my company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. ** * _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=la ng=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange and SAN
I'll kindly ask you to get off of my soapbox. My favorite one I've heard lately: Well, it uses fiber to attach to the SAN so it's much faster for Exchange. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 2:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and SAN As long as you don't buy into the great white lie of SAN's, you're golden. That lie is that there's no performance hit created by taking a single large array and carving it into a bunch of LUNs - there's a physics issue there. Other than that, its just a bunch of disks, just like the SCSI attached ones you probably have now. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Rosales, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 12:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange and SAN Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues with it? I've always had a raid array attached to it which could be the same thing but did not know if there were any major differences? Any help would be appreciate it. Thanks, Mario ** * The contents of this communication are intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication and notify the sender. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this communication that do not relate to the official business of my company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. ** * _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Exchange and SAN
I run 2 Exchange 2000 Enterprise servers on an HP EVA2 SAN. Each server has a 65GB IS right now and a 2GB Public IS. 16,000+ mailboxes total. I have seen no issues since migrating from our 5.5 environment 1 month ago to 2000 and moving away from direct attached SCSI disk environment. The big difference I have notice is that backups are faster because our Tape Unit is attached to the SAN as well and can be shared by both servers. -dan foerst _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
