January 11, 2016 at 7:08 pm
Hello,
We are planning to upgrad our SQL 2005 to SQL 2014 and due to SQL 2014 licenses cost we would like to centralize our storage and run SQL on two servers (HA mode). Currently, we have about 15 databases running across 5 servers. There are small databases; nothing too crazy. Here are some data for all 5 servers combined:
Disk Throughput: 600 MB/sec
IOPS 1958 at peak, 511 at 95%
Read/Write Ratio 68% / 32%
Total Local Capacity 4.28 TB
After meeting with Dell, I was given two options for the PowerVault:
12G SAS HBA
iSCSI
SAS seems to be easy to setup and maintain. However, I can only connect 4 servers. The iSCSI seems to be a good solution if I needed more than 4 servers. iSCSI allows me to expand easily, however, I need to get 2x10-Gigabit switches. And to me that's more rack space, power consumption and of course maintenance. Dell rep says that I can utilize my current Juniper Ex3300 and setup iSCSI with 1gbps for now and get 10gbps if needed down the road.
Moreover, I have never used SAN technology in the past. So I would like to get some ideas from the experts to help me decide which option is better for MS SQL. Assuming that we keep everything as is (no more databases, and not utilizing the SAN for anything else) which option would you pick? SAS or iSCSI and why?
Please note that the price different between SAS and iSCSI is not an issue. I pretty much like to know which of the two technologies works better for MS SQL as far as performance and management.
Thanks for your help.
January 12, 2016 at 8:35 am
David-377753 (1/11/2016)
Hello,We are planning to upgrad our SQL 2005 to SQL 2014 and due to SQL 2014 licenses cost we would like to centralize our storage and run SQL on two servers (HA mode). Currently, we have about 15 databases running across 5 servers. There are small databases; nothing too crazy. Here are some data for all 5 servers combined:
Disk Throughput: 600 MB/sec
IOPS 1958 at peak, 511 at 95%
Read/Write Ratio 68% / 32%
Total Local Capacity 4.28 TB
After meeting with Dell, I was given two options for the PowerVault:
12G SAS HBA
iSCSI
SAS seems to be easy to setup and maintain. However, I can only connect 4 servers. The iSCSI seems to be a good solution if I needed more than 4 servers. iSCSI allows me to expand easily, however, I need to get 2x10-Gigabit switches. And to me that's more rack space, power consumption and of course maintenance. Dell rep says that I can utilize my current Juniper Ex3300 and setup iSCSI with 1gbps for now and get 10gbps if needed down the road.
Moreover, I have never used SAN technology in the past. So I would like to get some ideas from the experts to help me decide which option is better for MS SQL. Assuming that we keep everything as is (no more databases, and not utilizing the SAN for anything else) which option would you pick? SAS or iSCSI and why?
Please note that the price different between SAS and iSCSI is not an issue. I pretty much like to know which of the two technologies works better for MS SQL as far as performance and management.
Thanks for your help.
You have 15 databases across 5 servers and the databases are small? I am not following here, any reason why these have to be across 5 servers?
For SAN most of the times it is either iSCSI or FC .
January 12, 2016 at 10:53 am
SAS is the actual disk type, iSCSI or FC are the actual protocols. What are your concerns
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Ya can't make an omelette without breaking just a few eggs" 😉
January 12, 2016 at 11:52 am
I'm referring to SAN interfaces. Dell offers SAN with either SAS, iSCSI or FC interfaces. I would like to know if anyone has used SAN with SAS interface (direct attached). If yes, then I want to know about your experience with SAS. Do you recommend it? was there issues? etc
Thanks.
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply