3 ms·
I am currently struggling with NetApp support. After 2 weeks of constant effort they finally admitted of disk latency. More digging revealed that they sold an
by drieddust 12y ago
I am currently struggling with NetApp support. After 2 weeks of constant effort they finally admitted of disk latency.
More digging revealed that they sold an under performing system at a inflated cost to run MS exchange 2010. NetApp do not add any value since Exchange do not need or actually utilise any of the features.
NetApp's WAFL( write anywhere) and insistence on using 4k block for disk io is the biggest design fault. Most systems nowadays uses bigger IO blocks to get more throughput with less IOPS.
Files on the disk also becomes highy files on the disk. Ironically they recommend to keep the defragmentation process turned off because there controller do not have enough comute powere to run the process in production. This is completed dishonest but very cleaver as it helps them sell more disks if customer doesn't dig deeper or don't have competence to ask right questions.
Another laughable design choice. Your size of SSD pool is very limited (12 TB on a FAS6000 series filer).
- hyuen 12y agoI think you should take a look at nimble, especially at the slide for exchange efficiency, it is on a microsoft page btw. Disclaimer I wrote the plugin to backup exchange at nimble.
- drieddust 12y agoThanks I think we will keep this in mind for next iteration. Currently we are neck deep into NetApp due to an idiot of a CTO.
- Ecio78 12y agoNetApp do not add any value since Exchange do not need or actually utilise any of the features. I never used Exchange on Netapp, but aren't they supposed to have a "SnapManager for.." tool to coordinate the Exchange backups with the storage snapshot process? I was using it for SQL Server.
- drieddust 12y agoYes they do have snap manager but backups mostly keep failing. With exchange 2010 you have database, mailbox, and item level redundancy and protection so I don't actually see the value. S
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- Ecio78 12y agoHA != backup you can have whatever redundancy you want, and maybe even lagged copies, but if you need to restore something months older, you still need backups..
- drieddust 12y agoAgreed Exchange does not needs NetApp HA capabilities if you use multiple copies of database. In our case NetApp sold snap manager for 30 remote copies of already triple redundant (one remote copy) database and then tape backup at month end. In my view they just fooled the unsuspecting customer and just oversold everything. That was fine too if it would have worked.