[THIN] Re: SAN Benefits for Citrix
- From: "Luchette, Jon" <JLuchette@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 15:19:34 -0400
yeah, that's the other thing that is a pain: the support. you call hp
with an issue about a blade booting from san, and their server engineers
don't know a thing about sans or fc switches or even hba's and their
storage engineers don't know anything about the blades. it's a
nightmare every time....
_______________________________________________
Jon Luchette
Emerson Hospital
Technology Specialist III
Work: 978-287-3369
Cell: 978-360-1379
jluchette@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Tom Diroff
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 3:17 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: SAN Benefits for Citrix
Yep, pretty much what we are seeing too with the addition of spotty
Linux support and blade center remote control software that is sometimes
balky. We use the Ibm branded Qlogic iScsi HBA's and it seems that
neither Qlogic nor IBM really want to support it since each say that it
is the others product.
<sigh>
Tom D
Joe Shonk wrote:
Issues with Chassis Vibrations... USB 1.x (need i say more. 2.0
had been out for years)... No raid controller cache. A fully
populated chassis cannot have redundant power domains... (the 2000w PS
are too small). If you reboot too many servers, some will shutdown and
the only way to power them up again is to pull the blade and reseat.
Plus a host of other issues...
Joe
On 7/19/06, Tom Diroff <tdiroff@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Joe
In what way were the first HS20 blades and chassis
poorly designed?
Thanks
Tom Diroff
Joe Shonk wrote:
I am refering the Drive/Controller... As far as
HP or IBM... Both... (for the HP blades I am refering to the SAS
controller)
IBM recommends a SAN basically because disk
perfomance sucks and the have an unusually high failure rate with the
drives. Then again, the first HS20 SCSI blades/chassis was poorly
designed.
Joe
On 7/19/06, Eldon < u2htdaab@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:u2htdaab@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
sre you referring to the drive
performance on blades? If so, would that be HP or IBM?
On 7/19/06, Joe Shonk <
joe.shonk@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:joe.shonk@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
Even the SCSI 10k drives are not that
great... Mostly because the onboard raid controllers are poorly
implemented and most do not have a cache.
Joe
On 7/19/06, Luchette, Jon <
JLuchette@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:JLuchette@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
i agree with that. you are limited as
to the local drives that come in blades. many will only have ide drives
available so the peformance benefits from FC disks are significant...
_______________________________________________
Jon Luchette
Emerson Hospital
Technology Specialist III
Work: 978-287-3369
Cell: 978-360-1379
jluchette@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> ] On Behalf
Of Jeff Pitsch
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 1:31 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: SAN Benefits for
Citrix
I've seen many orgs do this with the
older blades strictly because of the IDE drivers that were in use. They
were getting better performance from the SAN vs the local IDE drives.
Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
Forums not enough?
Get support from the experts at your
business
http://jeffpitschconsulting.com
<http://jeffpitschconsulting.com/>
On 7/19/06, Eldon < u2htdaab@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:u2htdaab@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
on a related note, for those
organizations that are using Blades for TS\Citrix, are a majority using
local blade disks rather than boot from SAN?
On 7/19/06, Jeff Pitsch <
jepitsch@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:jepitsch@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
while I agree with what your saying the
fact is is that if you are implementing a SAN most servers are probably
going to have HBA's in them already whether it's for backup or disk
access. If your implementing EMC SAN's then feasible and economical
aren't usually something they are necessarily worried about.
Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
Forums not enough?
Get support from the experts at your
business
http://jeffpitschconsulting.com
<http://jeffpitschconsulting.com/>
On 7/19/06, Landin, Mark <
Mark.Landin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Mark.Landin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >
wrote:
"Cost prohibitive" is a subjective
measure and varies by company. Yes, many places do it. That doesn't mean
it's feasible or economical in every organization.
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> ] On Behalf
Of Jeff Pitsch
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 9:08 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: SAN Benefits for
Citrix
there are so many organizations doing
boot from SAN that truly doubt it is cost prohibitive.
Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
Forums not enough?
Get support from the experts at your
business
http://jeffpitschconsulting.com
<http://jeffpitschconsulting.com/>
On 7/19/06, Eldon < u2htdaab@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:u2htdaab@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
my understanding is that it was disk
cost - the # of spindles needing to be allocated, multiplied by the
number of servers booting from SAN.....
On 7/19/06, Luchette, Jon <
JLuchette@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:JLuchette@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
right, what is he talking about. because
if he is talking about the hba's then that is not specific to booting
from the san, but just something that you will need if you want to use
your san at all...?
what is he talking about?
_______________________________________________
Jon Luchette
Emerson Hospital
Technology Specialist III
Work: 978-287-3369
Cell: 978-360-1379
jluchette@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> ] On Behalf
Of Landin, Mark
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 9:23 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: SAN Benefits for
Citrix
What cost does he associate with
boot-from-SAN?
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> ] On Behalf
Of Eldon
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 8:13 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] SAN Benefits for Citrix
My organization just installed an EMC
SAN and I was thinking how I could use it to benefit my current (XP FR3)
and future (upgrading to PS 4) environment. How can I use the SAN to
enhance my Citrix deployment (currently 15 servers, 250 concurrent
users, hardware become outdated and soon needs replacement)? I was told
by our SAN Admin that booting new servers from the SAN would probably be
cost prohibitive.
************************************************ For
Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or set Digest or Vacation mode
use the below link: //www.freelists.org/list/thin
************************************************
************************************************ For Archives, RSS, to
Unsubscribe, Subscribe or set Digest or Vacation mode use the below
link: //www.freelists.org/list/thin
************************************************
Other related posts:
