Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
mr_mist
Grunnio
1870 Posts |
 Posted - 2003-10-15 : 09:18:22
|
| HelloDoes anyone have any experiences, good or bad, or using networked storage systems to hold their SQL databases?We are experiencing one or two space and reliability issues with our SQL Server PCs and one of the suggestions to filter down is that we purchase a 5000 pound storage array with some 3TB of disk in it.The thing itself sounds quite nice, but I've not used one before so can't offer any real advice as to if it would be useful. Does anyone run their databases off networked storage? Does it work? Can it even be done? I'm sure whenever I've tried to attach a DB from a remote share it has not shown up in the list of drives. Do dedicated network storage systems work around this somehow?-------Moo. :) |
|
|
Merkin
Funky Drop Bear Fearing SQL Dude!
4970 Posts |
|
|
MichaelP
Jedi Yak
2489 Posts |
Posted - 2003-10-15 : 12:50:17
|
| Might I suggest an EMC CX400 or CX600. They are nice and Fibre attached vs Network attached. They are NOT cheap for 3TBs, but they are fast and nice to work with.Michael<Yoda>Use the Search page you must. Find the answer you will.</Yoda> |
 |
|
|
tkizer
Almighty SQL Goddess
38200 Posts |
Posted - 2003-10-15 : 14:43:46
|
| We use Compaq's EVA solution. It is very fast. We have been pretty happy with it. We use it on all of our production servers.Tara |
|
|
|
mr_mist
Grunnio
1870 Posts |
Posted - 2003-10-16 : 03:26:29
|
| Thanks for the input guys and girls. Do those of you that do use these things use them for read/write DBs as I see the article suggests read only.-------Moo. :) |
|
|
|
tkizer
Almighty SQL Goddess
38200 Posts |
Posted - 2003-10-16 : 12:21:04
|
| Our systems are mostly writes to the database. When we moved to the EVA solution, we did not see ANY performance degradation with writes. We are very happy with this solution. The only problem is the expense. We are out of ports on it, so we can't add any more servers to it. The cost of this is very expensive.Tara |
|
|
|
MichaelP
Jedi Yak
2489 Posts |
Posted - 2003-10-16 : 13:36:37
|
| We've not gotten our EMC box in yet, but I've seen one in action. You can configure the arrays pretyt much however you like, so you can tune it as needed for your setup. They are certainly not cheap though. A low end box with not too much storage will set you back $35-40K (Based on EMC CX200). An EVA solution is about $100K +If you need 3TB's of data, you'll probably need something along these lines though. 3Tb's will probably set you back about $100-150K depending on how you setup your arrays etc.Michael<Yoda>Use the Search page you must. Find the answer you will.</Yoda> |
|
|
|
tkizer
Almighty SQL Goddess
38200 Posts |
Posted - 2003-10-16 : 14:11:15
|
| Yeah, we needed several TB of storage space. We've got several databases that are over 75GB.Tara |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Networked Storage