1.) It is a best practice, yes 2.) I don't know that performance would be an issue for the snapinfo stuff (this is what you are referring to), but it would be a bad idea from a DR standpoint: R200 isn't cluster-capable and has (currently) only single-path storage. That said, at least the files would be on a different system, removing some of the SPOF issues.

Glenn

-----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters@mathworks.com on behalf of Hadrian Baron Sent: Thu 7/20/2006 11:43 AM To: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Questions on Storage Allocation with Snap Manager for Exchange

We are running Snap Manager for Exchange 3.1 R1 with an Exchange 2000 cluster. LUNs are sitting on a 940C with DOT 7.1.

Lately we have been having issues with our server getting very close to filling up their log drive. We have the Snap Manager directory also sitting on the Exchange log drive.

To alleviate this issue temporarily I created a seperate LUN and pointed SME to store its own log files there instead.

Until we can upgrade to SME 4.x (no more SME log directory), I have two questions:

1. Is this a best practice to store the SME log files on a different drive/LUN than the Exchange log lun? 2. Would it harm or significantly slow down the SME backup process to store the SME log LUN on an R200 instead of our 940?

How does everyone else have this set up? Thanks for your input,

Hadrian Baron Network Engineer VEGAS.com