Solved

DELL MD3000i SAN Config

Posted on 2013-06-21
14
961 Views
Last Modified: 2016-11-23
EE,

I need some configuration assistance for my current DELL SAN environment.  I have 2 small Virtual Servers R610, R620.  Each with about 6 VM's a piece.  We have 4 SQL, 2 IIS, and then a couple File, DC, and Utility Servers.

My main question is I just bought 5 new 300GB 10k drives to fill out our MD3000i SAN, and I want to make one big Backup disc.  I have the tool VEEAM Backup & Rep and it saves complete image backups.  I would just map a drive from the Server to the SAN and set it to auto backup.

What I don't know is how to maximize performance on to the SAN disk group?  Should I just add these drives (1.5 TB) to the current disk group (2.6 TB) and make a new Virtual Disk, or should I create a second Disk group of 1.5 TB solely for the 2012 Server that is running the VEEAM backup? And should I be using RAID 5?  There is only 1 controller also.  We are not a heavy load environment, all of our main production servers are hosted at Rackspace.

Attached is a screenshot of what's configured.

Thx...
SAN-Disk-Group.JPG
0
Comment
Question by:RyanHenry
[X]
Welcome to Experts Exchange

Add your voice to the tech community where 5M+ people just like you are talking about what matters.

  • Help others & share knowledge
  • Earn cash & points
  • Learn & ask questions
  • 7
  • 3
  • 3
14 Comments
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:insidetech
ID: 39266251
I favor separating the disk groups. As far as performance goes.... Unless you are running out of time to backup the whole set over night, I would not worry too much.
RAID 5 would likely be the slowest one though. If you can, I recommend setting it up as RAD 10.
0
 
LVL 120

Accepted Solution

by:
Andrew Hancock (VMware vExpert / EE MVE^2) earned 500 total points
ID: 39266279
More disks in the same group will add to performance, so I would add them all to the same group, and then create a virtual disk out of the group.
0
 

Author Comment

by:RyanHenry
ID: 39266283
Ok, so it is ok to create 1 disk group of 1.5TB, and is it also ok to keep the current RAID 5, and run a new RAID 10 side by side?  Also, will the the hot spare that is configured for the RAID 5 also cover for the new RAID 10 automatically? (The drive are all the same size throughout)
0
Flexible connectivity for any environment

The KE6900 series can extend and deploy computers with high definition displays across multiple stations in a variety of applications that suit any environment. Expand computer use to stations across multiple rooms with dynamic access.

 

Author Comment

by:RyanHenry
ID: 39266289
hanccocka,

Just saw your post now.  So you recommend the opposite, to add them all to the same group.  That's also what i read when I was looking for advise on other sites.  I was already leaning towards this but was unsure.  Is there any downside to having them all in the same group or anything?
0
 

Author Comment

by:RyanHenry
ID: 39266299
Also, when I choose virtual disk I/O characteristics there are 3 options.  File system, Database, and multimedia. Multimedia changes the cache pre-fetch to 256KB otherwise the others are 128KB.  Is there any added benefit to either?
0
 
LVL 120
ID: 39266302
More Disks = More Spindles = More IOPS = More Performance.

RAID 10 is fastest for performance, read and write when compared to RAID 5.

Two separate RAID groups can give double the resilience. (because you got) two different groups.

If you want the maximum performance, Current RAID 5 versus 5 Disk RAID 10, I would need todo some sums....there is a performance hit using RAID5, but you already have a number of disks allocated to it...

how many in RAID 5?
0
 

Author Comment

by:RyanHenry
ID: 39266310
Actually now that you mention it, I need all the drive space I can get, so RAID 5 is my only option.  Thanks for the help, I am going to just add a new Virtual Disk to the current Disk Group and call it a day.

Thx again!
0
 
LVL 120
ID: 39266313
no problems
0
 

Author Closing Comment

by:RyanHenry
ID: 39266319
Always get the best answer from him!
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:insidetech
ID: 39266437
I think that after you are all finished with the route you have chosen, you will come to realization that it is very problematic.
Good luck....

(Edit: Off-topic comments removed.)
0
 

Author Comment

by:RyanHenry
ID: 39266512
If you would like to clarify what you mean go for it as I was waiting for a logical response and hanccockas was best?

(Edit: Unrelated comments removed.)
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:insidetech
ID: 39266580
From a technical point of view the choice you made may come back to hunt you.
Here are just few points to ponder...

- you are going to tamper with existing RAID 5  by adding drives to it. Potentially jeopardizing the data on it if something goes wrong. Do you have another backup or can you afford to loose it?
- in RAID 5 more spindles == more read speed. Write speed increase is minimal. BUT... more spindles === more drives that one of which may fail. Simple statistics here...
If your RAID is deprecated the performance during re-build is horrible and the bigger the array is.... the longer it takes.    

There are many other not so significant factors to re-consider, but these are the more important ones.

(Edit: Off-topic comments removed.)
0
 

Author Comment

by:RyanHenry
ID: 39266684
My SAN knowledge is still in the beginning stages, so had I had this information from you originally I would have liked to hear other points of view on these two scenarios.  Thanks for your time it was appreciated, maybe I will create a new thread geared towards this specifically as I would really like to do this correctly from the start.
0

Featured Post

Independent Software Vendors: We Want Your Opinion

We value your feedback.

Take our survey and automatically be enter to win anyone of the following:
Yeti Cooler, Amazon eGift Card, and Movie eGift Card!

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

In this article, I will show you HOW TO: Suppress Configuration Issues and Warnings Alert displayed in Summary status for ESXi 6.5 after enabling SSH or ESXi Shell.
Many businesses neglect disaster recovery and treat it as an after-thought. I can tell you first hand that data will be lost, hard drives die, servers will be hacked, and careless (or malicious) employees can ruin your data.
This Micro Tutorial walks you through using a remote console to access a server and install ESXi 5.1. This example is showing remote access and installation using a Dell server. The hypervisor is the very first component of your virtual infrastructu…
How to Install VMware Tools in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.4 (RHEL 6.4) Step-by-Step Tutorial

738 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question