May 7, 2003 at 8:40 am
We currently have a Active/Passive cluster that has about 80GB of databases and we need to expand the disk in order to add additional databases that we are bringing over. Our Quorum and Data share are on a SAN partition. Has anyone had any experience expanding the LUN without breaking the cluster -- on the SAN side this can be done without a problem, but from what I hear the cluster is going to have a problem with this. Is this true? Do we have to break the cluster and then re-establish everything? I'm trying to have as little downtime as possible for my company/clients because the sites are business critical.
Any assistance would be great.
Thanks!
Thats Bigman 2 Y-O-U!
May 8, 2003 at 10:14 am
No idea how to do specifically what you want, but I know there are issue's. Whay not just consider adding a LUN, and have two drives.
KlK, MCSE
KlK
May 9, 2003 at 8:00 am
Thanks for the reply KIK....we currently have this in place with one LUN for data and another for backups -- just wanted to make it a bit easier to manage. Adding another LUN would basically make it two drives for data -- nothing wrong with that, just managing it becomes a pain.
Pretty much everything that I have seen has pointed to this as well. I don't think there is a way around it unless we bring it down and I don't think my customers are going to go for that....but we will see.
Thanks again!
Thats Bigman 2 Y-O-U!
May 9, 2003 at 8:57 am
Why is an extra LUN a problem? We have two LUNs for SQL Server and both have around 160 GB of database on them. I manage both without any problems.
-SQLBill
May 9, 2003 at 8:59 am
For most of our DB servers that are on SANs I request multiple LUNs. I think there is a lot of benefits separating things. I try and put Data, Logs, and Temp each on their own drive. Sometimes one for backups too.
I actually think space management becomes easier. Easier to manage if the LUN doesn't have a lot of extra space, you don't want the DB running out of space because TempDB got to big, or you backups consumed all of the space.
Also consider fragmentation, while not as important in the SAN world I still don't like seeing MDF's in multiple pieces, unless I set them up that way.
Even with SANs you still have IO contention, hopefully the storage people spread each LUN onto separate drive groups.
KlK, MCSE
KlK
May 9, 2003 at 9:24 am
Hey guys...SQLBill and KIK I agree with you with spreading it across multiple LUN's. The only worry I have is when another engineer/team members do setups and OOOPS does a setup on the existing LUN that is running out of space. No biggie -- just handcuff them to the documentation and pray that things will work.
Thanks again!
Bigman2U
Thats Bigman 2 Y-O-U!
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply