| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| ScotH |
Posted - 08/26/2008 : 5:30:31 PM
We are maxing out the disk space on our 5-year old server, and it's time for a replacement. The current server acts mostly a file and print server, but we have one SQL app that could be moved. Can anyone tell me the advantages of moving to a NAS and Windows Storage Server? If I go that direction, I imagine performance will be slightly better, but then I loose the ability to run SQL apps (and maybe other apps I am not aware of). |
| 4 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| wim |
Posted - 09/22/2008 : 2:38:54 PM
if your server is 5 years old wouldn't it be more logical to just upgrade the old thing to new stuff. You could move part of the functions of the main server to the NAS, depeding on the brand this is more or less possible.
|
| brbandeira |
Posted - 08/27/2008 : 11:42:23 AM
The ability to dynamically expand RAID really is a hardware funcion.
All my problems lie on the Windows Storage Server just because of the updates.
We might buy another NAS next year and the use of regular Windows 2003 or 2008 Server will be mandatory. No Windows Storage Server.
I am also studying how can we install a regular 2003 Server on my HP NAS, so the Storage Server is removed.
About using the SQL along with the Storage Server, just don't go there. When I said about running SQL alone, I ment using a regular server to run it.
It is a very good idea to check for some Tape Libraries. I don't know where would I be without the one I use. |
| ScotH |
Posted - 08/27/2008 : 10:00:42 AM
Yes, the ability to expand the RAID without all the typical hassle is very appealing. We use Dell, and they claim this capability too, but I need to confirm that.
As for the WSUS updates, that's a good point I need to investigate.
As for letting SQL run alone on the server, I'm not sure what limitations in Storage Server make it ineffective.
To this point, it is difficult to see the case in favor or Windows Storage Server. The ability to dynamically expand the RAID looks to be more a function of the server device and its management software rather than a function of Windows.
As for backup device, I am looking at an LTO 4 drive, but need to start looking at tape library options.
|
| brbandeira |
Posted - 08/26/2008 : 11:09:28 PM
I've been using a HP NAS 2000S since 2004 and I like it a lot. It came with very nice Disk Array Tools that makes physical disc management very easy. I am able to add new disks to the array (yes, you can increase the volume size) without having to build a new array or stopping the server. This is very useful, because all the other RAID Controllers I’ve worked with, you could not add disks to an existing array. You always had to build a new array.
The only thing I don’t like is the Windows Storage Server. Because the one that came with the HP NAS was build for that hardware, you cannot update using WSUS, Configuration Manager 2007 or Windows Update site. You need to wait for HP to release the update for that particular system and apply one by one. They don’t even release a good package. Now, with all these million worms, this update problem is affecting easy management.
I think NAS is great, but I suggest not using Windows Storage Server. Still, you can check with your vendor if they can guarantee you will be able to use WSUS, Configuration Manager 2007 and Windows Update Site with that O.S.
Also ask about how will you be able to use the NAS on a SAN structure. You might need that in a few years and your hardware will need to support it.
About the SQL, can you leave it running alone on the actual server?
What are you planning for your backup device? I had to buy a Tape Library in order to use NAS. Otherwise I would go nuts changing tapes.
|
|
|
