I have a limited number of disks right now in my EMC CX300 SAN. I am going to deploy a CCR pair of mailbox servers and I am wonder what the opinion is for the best way to layout my LUNs. There will be 3 servers connected. 1 CAS/HUB and the 2 MB servers. I have 15 133GB SCSI disks in the SAN. So far, I have 1 RAID1 raid group split in 3 LUNs, and the other 13 disks in one large RAID5 group and several LUNs in there split umoungst the 3 servers. Does this make any sense? Should I have seperate RAID groups of 3 disks each for the different Storage groups? how much performance will i lose by having all 3 servers use the same RAID1 for logs and the same large RAID5 for DBs? I won't have enough disks to really do it right with a raid1 and a raid5 group per server, so I am looking for advice on getting the most performance out of it as is. Thanks, Rich
On Fri, 23 May 2008 08:30:01 -0700, Rich Bashaw wrote: >I have a limited number of disks right now in my EMC CX300 SAN. I am going to >deploy a CCR pair of mailbox servers and I am wonder what the opinion is for >the best way to layout my LUNs. There will be 3 servers connected. 1 CAS/HUB >and the 2 MB servers. I have 15 133GB SCSI disks in the SAN. So far, I have 1 >RAID1 raid group split in 3 LUNs, and the other 13 disks in one large RAID5 >group and several LUNs in there split umoungst the 3 servers. Does this make >any sense? Should I have seperate RAID groups of 3 disks each for the >different Storage groups? how much performance will i lose by having all 3 >servers use the same RAID1 for logs and the same large RAID5 for DBs? I won't >have enough disks to really do it right with a raid1 and a raid5 group per >server, so I am looking for advice on getting the most performance out of it >as is. > >Thanks, > >Rich First off, my sympathies for deploying an EMC product. RAID5 is completely the wrong thing to think of as the I/O profile of Exchange 2007 does not lend itself to RAID5 at all. RAID6 is on offer but I'm not sure it's available on your build so you'll have to check. 2nd option is RAID10 which would probably be better for you. Why is the CAS/HT connected, or are you planning on booting from SAN? Get your vendor to carve the disks up properly as they can give you the right mix of logs and databases in and around the "onion ring" so that you don't experience any hot-spotting.
You shouldn't be using RAID 5. The write penalty of 4 is too high for an application with a read/write ratio close to 1:1. Use RAID 1 or RAID 10 for the DBs as well. "Rich Bashaw" wrote in message news:C1982968-B26F-4066-894E-22E4DB1FA8CD@microsoft.com... >I have a limited number of disks right now in my EMC CX300 SAN. I am going >to > deploy a CCR pair of mailbox servers and I am wonder what the opinion is > for > the best way to layout my LUNs. There will be 3 servers connected. 1 > CAS/HUB > and the 2 MB servers. I have 15 133GB SCSI disks in the SAN. So far, I > have 1 > RAID1 raid group split in 3 LUNs, and the other 13 disks in one large > RAID5 > group and several LUNs in there split umoungst the 3 servers. Does this > make > any sense? Should I have seperate RAID groups of 3 disks each for the > different Storage groups? how much performance will i lose by having all 3 > servers use the same RAID1 for logs and the same large RAID5 for DBs? I > won't > have enough disks to really do it right with a raid1 and a raid5 group per > server, so I am looking for advice on getting the most performance out of > it > as is. > > Thanks, > > Rich
On top of what John and Mark have said, if you are really attempting to work all this out yourself (when it appears you may need a little more knowledge on the subject) I would take a look at the Exchange 2007 Storage Calculator and then work on it from there. http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2007/01/15/432207.aspx Speak to your vendor too - if that's an option. Oliver
On Tue, 27 May 2008 12:58:48 +0100, "Oliver Moazzezi [MVP]" wrote: >On top of what John and Mark have said, if you are really attempting to work >all this out yourself (when it appears you may need a little more knowledge >on the subject) I would take a look at the Exchange 2007 Storage Calculator >and then work on it from there. > >http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2007/01/15/432207.aspx > >Speak to your vendor too - if that's an option. > >Oliver > And treat the disk numbers that the calculator gives you with extreme caution; in fact, ignore the numbers and give the spreadsheet to your vendor. The vendor is the person best placed to give you disk (i.e. spindle) numbers, not Microsoft.
I was going to attach the CAS/HUB just to seperate the logs and DBs drives since it uses that setup as well. All of my servers are blade servers, so they only have mirrored drives in them. The CAS/HUB has 137 GB on it, so if I won't lose performance i would glady recover the SAN space it is using. It will also be the witness server for the CCR cluster. I have a call in to my vendor about the SAN. Do you think I can get away with just using the internal disks on the CAS/HUB? "Mark Arnold [MVP]" wrote: > On Tue, 27 May 2008 12:58:48 +0100, "Oliver Moazzezi [MVP]" > wrote: > > >On top of what John and Mark have said, if you are really attempting to work > >all this out yourself (when it appears you may need a little more knowledge > >on the subject) I would take a look at the Exchange 2007 Storage Calculator > >and then work on it from there. > > > >http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2007/01/15/432207.aspx > > > >Speak to your vendor too - if that's an option. > > > >Oliver > > > And treat the disk numbers that the calculator gives you with extreme > caution; in fact, ignore the numbers and give the spreadsheet to your > vendor. The vendor is the person best placed to give you disk (i.e. > spindle) numbers, not Microsoft. >
Hi there, can you advise how to find out how much SAN spaces available. thanks
http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2007/01/15/432207.aspx -- Hope it helps. dw ----------------------------------------------- Don Wilwol www.atTheDataCenter.com "vivian" wrote in message news:90457EB3-0E5F-45AF-A184-CBE1A2C31193@microsoft.com... > Hi there, > can you advise how to find out how much SAN spaces available. > thanks
