Microsoft Virtualization Discussions

Re: What do you think of this spec of SAN?

Hi Wei,

I actually couldn't find any up-to-date doc describing Exchange 2003 best practices.

This one is from Nov 2006 & actually doesn't recommend separate aggregates for logs:

http://media.netapp.com/documents/tr-3350.pdf

Having said that, personally I would carefully read the TR-3578 from Brad Garvey - although written for Exchange 2007, some recommendations are applicable for 2003 as well:

http://media.netapp.com/documents/tr-3578.pdf

Page 11 gives nice view on single vs. two aggregates dilemma.

Regards,
Radek

Re: What do you think of this spec of SAN?

Hi Radek,

You are right. TR-3578 should be a good reference for Exchange 2003 as well. Separating database and logs is a "good to do", not "must do".

Regards,

Wei

Re: What do you think of this spec of SAN?

Thank you.

I've just now had a meeting with a Netapp reseller who is 100% confident that a fully loaded 2040 with an additional shelf populated with 16 discs (out of 28) will suffice for our IO quite easily.

Thanks again for the pointers.  Without tweaking Exchange I think we'll benefit from a SAN anyway in that currently we're using local storage for Exchange with only a 512MB cache.  The 2040 comes with 4GB so this will surely help in itsself let alone the fact there are more spindles to go at!

Forums