If the sole purpose for purchasing the filer is for this 50gig exchange database, it is probably not easy to make a good business case.
However, if the filer is part of a larger storage strategy for your organization, it should be much easier to build a convincing business case.
I think that the real benefits of NAS/SAN come from the ability to consolidate individual server storage and centrally manage. Other benefits include reliability, strong product support (at least with NetApp) and a proven track-record etc <insert marketing jargon here>
For example; If you already connect Windows CIFS (or any other protocol for that matter) on the FAS250 then you may have already proven that the FAS250 works in your environment and that it provided some consolidation/management benefits. You should be able to show that the system is reliable and the performance has met expectations (otherwise you wouldn't be considering it for an exchange DB). If you have used NetApp support, chances are that you had a good experience. Moving more storage services to the FAS250 over time is what this entry-level device was designed for .... expansion, future-proofing, or whatever you want to call it. This is because it can fairly easily become a disk shelf in a larger F9XX series system if you choose to expand to an enterprise or high-availability (aka clustered/mirrored) storage solution.
If you do expand, you should be able to do so without significantly increasing the amount of time spent managing the filer(s). Whereas adding a separate RAID array for every server/service could lead to considerably more time spent setting up and maintaining. On the surface, less moving parts (aka RAID controllers, servers, vendors) results in a simpler environment.
Hope this helps seed some ideas for you.
Aaron
-----Original Message----- From: Derek Lai [mailto:Derek.Lai@onyxco.com] Sent: Tuesday, 19 October 2004 6:22 AM To: 'exadmin'; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: RE: Exchange databse on a FAS 250
You can create a iSCSI lun that is 50GB for now. When it fills up, you can grow it on the fly.
You can instantaneously restore using SnapShot. You can also snapmirror it elsewhere for Disaster Recovery.
If you get the Single Mailbox Restore option you can restore any single message from any mailbox in any snapshot.
Derek
-----Original Message----- From: exadmin [mailto:exadmin@insuranceskillscenter.com] Sent: Monday, October 18, 2004 10:29 AM To: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Exchange databse on a FAS 250
Hi all
I am trying to make an argumetn for putting our exchange database (50 gigs) on a filer instead of a windows 2000 box with raid 5 array. We are running Exchange 5.5 Other than the snpshot technology what other benefits will we get with using a filer VS a windows box
thanks a bunch This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.
************** IMPORTANT MESSAGE ************** This e-mail message is intended only for the addressee(s) and contains information which may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient please advise the sender by return email, do not use or disclose the contents, and delete the message and any attachments from your system. Unless specifically indicated, this email does not constitute formal advice or commitment by the sender or the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (ABN 48 123 123 124) or its subsidiaries. We can be contacted through our web site: commbank.com.au. If you no longer wish to receive commercial electronic messages from us, please reply to this e-mail by typing Unsubscribe in the subject line. ***************************************************************
In general, I would agree, however, it really depends on how often you do single mailbox restores. I see the following types of schemes for single mailbox restores:
1. None - deleted items retention is set really high, and it results in a larger IS than is necessary.
2. Traditional brick level backups - do a DB backup as well as a brick level backup, which is 5-6x slower. They're done fairly rarely (maybe once a week), so you have a high deleted items retention, again with a larger IS than is necessary. Plus restores are complex, often to the point where they're really not worth it anyway.
3. SMBR with PowerControls and some other software. Almost as good as restoring from Netapp snapshots, but they're slower, because you have to run through the entire tape.
4. SMBR with Netapp snapshots - enough said.
If you're lucky enough to have set your user expectations such that they do not expect single mail item restores, well, I guess you're right. But you're certain to have packrats; if they're not keeping their junk in the IS, they're keeping it in .pst files on their local computers as well as your network storage. It's amazing what a little confidence in the sysadmin's ability to restore data does to get people to delete old data.
The business case should involve: 1. Cost of software and additional hardware (you have to have 2 volumes for Exchange) - and if you have a large number of users, it might be advisable to upgrade the filer; your Netapp SE can give you advice on this. 2. Savings in the licensing cost for your existing Exchange backup scheme 3. Time savings for sysadmin for SMBR 4. User productivity savings that comes with SMBR 5. Savings on the cost of media (but remember you're going to want to put the data on tape for DR according to your requirements; unless you decide to use snapmirror, snapvault, or something else) 6. Enhanced confidence in backups (more frequent backups to more reliable media) 7. Potential savings for time to recover from edb corruption.
It should be relatively easy to calculate the savings, based on the average user/sysadmin loaded hourly cost. #7 might actually put you over the top, depending on how many users you support.
But really; ask for a demo of the software, making sure the naysayers are there for it. Your Netapp rep ought to be able to get on together for you. He might also be able to help you calculate the return on investment.
--paul
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:34:17 +1000, Hill, Aaron aaron.hill@cba.com.au wrote:
If the sole purpose for purchasing the filer is for this 50gig exchange database, it is probably not easy to make a good business case.
However, if the filer is part of a larger storage strategy for your organization, it should be much easier to build a convincing business case.
I think that the real benefits of NAS/SAN come from the ability to consolidate individual server storage and centrally manage. Other benefits include reliability, strong product support (at least with NetApp) and a proven track-record etc <insert marketing jargon here>
For example; If you already connect Windows CIFS (or any other protocol for that matter) on the FAS250 then you may have already proven that the FAS250 works in your environment and that it provided some consolidation/management benefits. You should be able to show that the system is reliable and the performance has met expectations (otherwise you wouldn't be considering it for an exchange DB). If you have used NetApp support, chances are that you had a good experience. Moving more storage services to the FAS250 over time is what this entry-level device was designed for .... expansion, future-proofing, or whatever you want to call it. This is because it can fairly easily become a disk shelf in a larger F9XX series system if you choose to expand to an enterprise or high-availability (aka clustered/mirrored) storage solution.
If you do expand, you should be able to do so without significantly increasing the amount of time spent managing the filer(s). Whereas adding a separate RAID array for every server/service could lead to considerably more time spent setting up and maintaining. On the surface, less moving parts (aka RAID controllers, servers, vendors) results in a simpler environment.
Hope this helps seed some ideas for you.
Aaron
-----Original Message----- From: Derek Lai [mailto:Derek.Lai@onyxco.com] Sent: Tuesday, 19 October 2004 6:22 AM To: 'exadmin'; toasters@mathworks.com Subject: RE: Exchange databse on a FAS 250
You can create a iSCSI lun that is 50GB for now. When it fills up, you can grow it on the fly.
You can instantaneously restore using SnapShot. You can also snapmirror it elsewhere for Disaster Recovery.
If you get the Single Mailbox Restore option you can restore any single message from any mailbox in any snapshot.
Derek
-----Original Message----- From: exadmin [mailto:exadmin@insuranceskillscenter.com] Sent: Monday, October 18, 2004 10:29 AM To: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Exchange databse on a FAS 250
Hi all
I am trying to make an argumetn for putting our exchange database (50 gigs) on a filer instead of a windows 2000 box with raid 5 array. We are running Exchange 5.5 Other than the snpshot technology what other benefits will we get with using a filer VS a windows box
thanks a bunch This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.
************** IMPORTANT MESSAGE ************** This e-mail message is intended only for the addressee(s) and contains information which may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient please advise the sender by return email, do not use or disclose the contents, and delete the message and any attachments from your system. Unless specifically indicated, this email does not constitute formal advice or commitment by the sender or the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (ABN 48 123 123 124) or its subsidiaries. We can be contacted through our web site: commbank.com.au. If you no longer wish to receive commercial electronic messages from us, please reply to this e-mail by typing Unsubscribe in the subject line.
-
Hill, Aaron -
Paul Galjan