June 24, 2010 at 8:09 am
Hi list,
I am running MS SQL Server 2008 Standard Edition on Hyper-V machine with windows server 2008 installed on.
My data are stored on a LUN. On the Windows server where I am running the SQL Sever I have one drive where the Log files are located and another drive where data files are located.
I would like to increase the size of the partition where the log files are located so that I have more space on the server for the log files.
My question is:
If I ask the SAN Admin to increase the size of the partition for the log files dynamically, that is while the SQL Server is running, will it affect any of component of the SQL Server? Especially the database engine?
On the SQL Server I have MOSS 2007 running. The MOSS Server installation is on another dedicated server. This is not SQL topic, but may be some one has experience with this? Will the dynamic expansion of the partition for the log file affect the functionality of the MOSS Application?
I would appreciate if anyone can give me information about this issue.
Thanks indeed in advance.
Regards
Niyala
June 24, 2010 at 8:15 am
Unless the SAN admin does something odd then increasing a LUN should not affect a thing. We often increase the size of a LUN and it has never had an impact on any application including SQL.
Dan
If only I could snap my figures and have all the correct indexes apear and the buffer clean and.... Start day dream here.
June 24, 2010 at 8:22 am
Hi There,
Thanks for your information!
Is there anything that I have got to do or prepare before the SAN Admin dynamically expands the LUN? For example, do I need to stop any of the services of the SQL Server, detach the database?
Thanks indeed in advance.
Regards
Niyala
June 24, 2010 at 8:25 am
I would talk to your SAN Admin to verify but there should be no reason for him to take down the LUNS when expanding them. As such there should be no action needed on your part. I have never taken down SQL or any other application when we have expanded but our admins have never taken the LUNS off line during this process.
Dan
If only I could snap my figures and have all the correct indexes apear and the buffer clean and.... Start day dream here.
June 24, 2010 at 8:39 am
Thanks indeed.
With which edition of SQL Sever 2008 did you make your experience?
Regards
Niyala
June 24, 2010 at 8:42 am
We use 2005 mostly we are only using 2008 in test at this point but I do not beleive it would make a difference at all. Again I think you need to confrm with your SAN admin that he will not take the LUNS offline but we have never had an issue.
Dan
If only I could snap my figures and have all the correct indexes apear and the buffer clean and.... Start day dream here.
October 13, 2010 at 2:20 am
Do you know dynamic disk can not be recognized by the Windows Server Edition? If you convert basic to dynamic disk accidentally, you should convert dynamic disk back to back to basic disk.
How the operation can be finished perfectly and do not delete the dynamic volume, in other words, the conversion will not make us lose any data at all--I searched the answer for a long time on the internet, got it--Dynamic Disk Converter is the best choice.
Get more information through the website below.
http://www.dynamic-disk.com/convert-dynamic-disk-to-basic.html
October 13, 2010 at 3:56 pm
I agree with Dan. We still have some operational 2000 instances that we have not been able to migrate to 2008 yet, and with our SAN vendor we can increase the LUN while SQL is running with no impact at all on SQL. Expansions are usually adding free space to be used, so it is not touching used files at all. I know for my environment it is only operations like rebuilding LUNs or moving LUNs from one physical storage device to another that would cause an issue with SQL.
Joie Andrew
"Since 1982"
Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply