DFS is truly only distributed in the sense you are talking about on Windows 2003R2, in Windows 2003/SP1/SP2 DFS only publishes a link to a single storage and replicates the link instead of using the disk in aggregate. Instead you could do a couple of things if you want to help your organization.
1. You could examine the use of VMWare Server(GSX) or VMWare ESX to consolidate the number of physical boxes essentially freeing up hardware. Hardware that can then be re-used to created Shadow Volume Copy Services. Be aware that walking the VM environment will cause you to carefully plan the amount of memory each server contains and you should not exceed 50% of the total phyiscal memory for any hosted machines.
2. Shadow Volume Copy services will provide for users making bonehead mistakes and with a simple document you can train them how to enable the Volume Shadow Copy on their machines giving them the ability to retrieve past revisions without having to dip into slow backups.
3. You should talk over your concern with your management and discuss any plans so that you have their buy-in.
4. DFS is a definite option if you have the ability to essentially free up a ton of space that will be dedicated strictly to storage and needs to be replicated to other sites (i.e. network installed applications, etc.)
To all of you reading this and suggesting Linux Solutions, I love the ideas however, the reality is that not everyone has the freedom to introduce OSS into their environment. I tried and was successful for a short period o time, however, it was deemed to be a non-starter since all of the applications are designed and run on WinBlows.
AH to dream......
I would tend to agree with some of your hypothesis in that when implementing RAID that the chief concern is reliability. However, we look for the Speed of the RAID and Size it supports for whever we choose to use a RAID implementation. Cost is usually them most irrelevant of all factors (unless your company is driving cost issues). Performance is always more important in the long run.
As far as performance of SATA coming close to SCSI (7200 vs 15K) SCSI wins hands down. Also you have to take into account the new Serial SCSI which is far superior to SATA and even old SCSI technology. Smaller, just as fast, less power consuming, and equally reliable (yet to be seen but based on past experience with SCSI, I'll give it the benefit of the doubt).
I also need to just state that all SPEED ratings are not really sustained rate under load they are always quoted at the fastest speed but seeing SATA vs SCSI on SQL Intensive APP server I can say SCSI by far and away is much faster.
Finally on your last point how do they compare, there is no comparison. We have a NAS comprised of all SCSI DISKS we purchased a year ago ad have had no drive losses. At the same time we have a NAS of (hold up to 18 SATA drives) and we have repeatedly lost drives (8 over a year). I think the bigger difference is that in the day of RACK Server which genereate alot of heat and noise SATA cannot stand up to the same environmental factors that the SCSI can.
SATA is great for homes and desktop but it just does not have the robustness for the data center yet (IMHO). in a few more years we'll go back and revisit especially if they get the RAM drives out (waiting and drooling) because lets face it, low latency, high speed, quiet, low power consumption, and no moving parts to break - im geeked!!!! Now just need price to line up with High end scsi and I say let the experimentation begin.....
I will start with possible flamebait here..... Excuse me but working with a global company I can say IBM / Lenovo and HP are still major players in the hardware sector when it comes to laptops and desktops. Outside the US, equipment from the aforementioned companies are much easier to procure than from anywhere else (IMHO), so I will agree to disagree. As far as Alienware being bought by Dell goes, lets face it your paying for the case and name. Being owned by Dell does not change the fact our still going to be paying for the case and name. The hardware is still no better or worse than before, and will still be on par with any other computer manufacturer. The support I suspect will also be no better or worse than what I would expect from any of these large companies already. Anyone complaining how bad Alienware is on their hardware or on their support hasn't had to deal with a variety of software / hardware vendors in a while, because frankly, they are all about the same. Finally, unless you, YOURSELF are building the machine from components that YOU want and YOU feel will work well together, you will get what you pay for.
This should have a disclaimer that reads:
Imbibing any liquid while reading about the possible new ad campaign can cause uncontrolled laughter with possible nasal leakage accompanied by choking
Yup the good ol' it's who you know not what you know skills coupled with the place the who holds in the food chain. I agree that its mighty important *especially* in IT to network with peers. Best jobs I have had generally come from referals, but occasionally you are forced to go searching if there aren't any positions open or are being phased down / out. So a general knowledge of throwing in a keyword is still important for the drones to find, in case of emergency.
you forgot my favorite when.Net was first released and employers were asking for 5 years.Net experience, or maybe another favorite of mine, I applied for a job in 2001 for an NT administrator and was told I need 5 years of AD experience....Fun things like that....
...like pouring rubbing alcohol on an open sore (most of the time). I agree with many posters that it is on the increase and the tide is likely to rise, however, I also agree that we can withold our dollars and not purchase a game. I personally feel that in-game advertising if done correctly AND in the right genre does not detract from game play and will actually enhance the experience making it more realistic. However, placing advertising in a game for the sake of advertising not only detracts from the game but from the advertising product as well. Throwning in a random Pepsi logo in a game like World of Warcraft is way out place, but throwing in a pepsi logo in a NASCAR game ( since the sport is riddled with advertising ) is totally acceptable and appropriate.Also in the case of games where there is advertising I would think that the savings should also be passed back to the consumer through a slightly lower price. I am not saying that the company devalue its software but man I personally would be more apt to spend money with a company that gave the illusion they actually cared about the person laying out the cash to buy they product. It could be a win-win for industry as well as the consumer. Then again I am a realist and know that the companies greed will far outweigh there care and passion for their customer.
Slashdot Mirror
DFS is truly only distributed in the sense you are talking about on Windows 2003R2, in Windows 2003/SP1/SP2 DFS only publishes a link to a single storage and replicates the link instead of using the disk in aggregate. Instead you could do a couple of things if you want to help your organization. 1. You could examine the use of VMWare Server(GSX) or VMWare ESX to consolidate the number of physical boxes essentially freeing up hardware. Hardware that can then be re-used to created Shadow Volume Copy Services. Be aware that walking the VM environment will cause you to carefully plan the amount of memory each server contains and you should not exceed 50% of the total phyiscal memory for any hosted machines. 2. Shadow Volume Copy services will provide for users making bonehead mistakes and with a simple document you can train them how to enable the Volume Shadow Copy on their machines giving them the ability to retrieve past revisions without having to dip into slow backups. 3. You should talk over your concern with your management and discuss any plans so that you have their buy-in. 4. DFS is a definite option if you have the ability to essentially free up a ton of space that will be dedicated strictly to storage and needs to be replicated to other sites (i.e. network installed applications, etc.) To all of you reading this and suggesting Linux Solutions, I love the ideas however, the reality is that not everyone has the freedom to introduce OSS into their environment. I tried and was successful for a short period o time, however, it was deemed to be a non-starter since all of the applications are designed and run on WinBlows. AH to dream......
I would tend to agree with some of your hypothesis in that when implementing RAID that the chief concern is reliability. However, we look for the Speed of the RAID and Size it supports for whever we choose to use a RAID implementation. Cost is usually them most irrelevant of all factors (unless your company is driving cost issues). Performance is always more important in the long run. As far as performance of SATA coming close to SCSI (7200 vs 15K) SCSI wins hands down. Also you have to take into account the new Serial SCSI which is far superior to SATA and even old SCSI technology. Smaller, just as fast, less power consuming, and equally reliable (yet to be seen but based on past experience with SCSI, I'll give it the benefit of the doubt). I also need to just state that all SPEED ratings are not really sustained rate under load they are always quoted at the fastest speed but seeing SATA vs SCSI on SQL Intensive APP server I can say SCSI by far and away is much faster. Finally on your last point how do they compare, there is no comparison. We have a NAS comprised of all SCSI DISKS we purchased a year ago ad have had no drive losses. At the same time we have a NAS of (hold up to 18 SATA drives) and we have repeatedly lost drives (8 over a year). I think the bigger difference is that in the day of RACK Server which genereate alot of heat and noise SATA cannot stand up to the same environmental factors that the SCSI can. SATA is great for homes and desktop but it just does not have the robustness for the data center yet (IMHO). in a few more years we'll go back and revisit especially if they get the RAM drives out (waiting and drooling) because lets face it, low latency, high speed, quiet, low power consumption, and no moving parts to break - im geeked!!!! Now just need price to line up with High end scsi and I say let the experimentation begin.....
I will start with possible flamebait here ..... Excuse me but working with a global company I can say IBM / Lenovo and HP are still major players in the hardware sector when it comes to laptops and desktops. Outside the US, equipment from the aforementioned companies are much easier to procure than from anywhere else (IMHO), so I will agree to disagree. As far as Alienware being bought by Dell goes, lets face it your paying for the case and name. Being owned by Dell does not change the fact our still going to be paying for the case and name. The hardware is still no better or worse than before, and will still be on par with any other computer manufacturer. The support I suspect will also be no better or worse than what I would expect from any of these large companies already. Anyone complaining how bad Alienware is on their hardware or on their support hasn't had to deal with a variety of software / hardware vendors in a while, because frankly, they are all about the same. Finally, unless you, YOURSELF are building the machine from components that YOU want and YOU feel will work well together, you will get what you pay for.
This should have a disclaimer that reads: Imbibing any liquid while reading about the possible new ad campaign can cause uncontrolled laughter with possible nasal leakage accompanied by choking
Yup the good ol' it's who you know not what you know skills coupled with the place the who holds in the food chain. I agree that its mighty important *especially* in IT to network with peers. Best jobs I have had generally come from referals, but occasionally you are forced to go searching if there aren't any positions open or are being phased down / out. So a general knowledge of throwing in a keyword is still important for the drones to find, in case of emergency.
you forgot my favorite when .Net was first released and employers were asking for 5 years .Net experience, or maybe another favorite of mine, I applied for a job in 2001 for an NT administrator and was told I need 5 years of AD experience....Fun things like that....
...like pouring rubbing alcohol on an open sore (most of the time). I agree with many posters that it is on the increase and the tide is likely to rise, however, I also agree that we can withold our dollars and not purchase a game. I personally feel that in-game advertising if done correctly AND in the right genre does not detract from game play and will actually enhance the experience making it more realistic. However, placing advertising in a game for the sake of advertising not only detracts from the game but from the advertising product as well. Throwning in a random Pepsi logo in a game like World of Warcraft is way out place, but throwing in a pepsi logo in a NASCAR game ( since the sport is riddled with advertising ) is totally acceptable and appropriate.Also in the case of games where there is advertising I would think that the savings should also be passed back to the consumer through a slightly lower price. I am not saying that the company devalue its software but man I personally would be more apt to spend money with a company that gave the illusion they actually cared about the person laying out the cash to buy they product. It could be a win-win for industry as well as the consumer. Then again I am a realist and know that the companies greed will far outweigh there care and passion for their customer.