We boot our IBM Blades, HS-20s and HS-40s from an IBM DS4500 and IBM DS4800.Some Pros:1. Replacing a server is a snap, specially if you can use your old HBA and don't have to change your WWN.2. No need for a RAID controller for local drives.3. Space, 14 Dual CPU servers in 7U of rack space4. Power/KVM/Network cable managability5. Can handle multiple drive failures and all systems stay running6. No waste, when my OS can run in under 7gig why RAID 1 a pair of 36Gig drives.Some Cons:1. Swap File, we keep it locally, can't remember if that was our determination or manufaturer's recommendation.2. HBA is a single point of failure, but then so is your RAID controller with local drives, never have had one fail.3. Welllll, I'll think of something else later or someone else will I'm sure.We moved away from EMC's Clarion's several years ago, so I can't comment on the performance of thier new stuff. We've seen very good performance on the IBM FastTs.George TaylorSystems ProgrammerRegional Health Inc.
From: Tom Kern [mailto:tpkern@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 12:52 PM
Subject: [ExchangeList] Re: SAN Boot
EMC told me they support it but were trying to sway us away from it.We have an unmanaged datacenter, so they felt replacing a failed server or HBA would add a layer of complexity for a level 1 tech to achieve.Also, they mentioned something about wasting LUN's for swap files for the OS.make any sense?Thanks
On 4/11/06, Michael B. Smith <michael@xxxxxxxxxx > wrote:
Works fine for me with HP SANs (the little MSA's) and EMC SANs.
Anyone have any pro or con for SAN booting win2k3 with Exchange 2k3?
I know its supported by MS but I'm not sure if we should go that route.
My manager is pushing for it.
We are about to purchase an EMC Clarion to put Exchange 2k3 on(which obviously i have no problem with) and SAN boot the OS(unsure about that).