Unsolved
This post is more than 5 years old
9 Posts
0
3639
Disk Group - MD3000i
When I create a Disk Group with a RAID 5 configuration, I will always get a minimum of 557GB in size. Individual drives are 297GB a piece, plus the third disk for the RAID. I want to create smaller Virtual Disks in the Group. I can't figure out how.
Any Ideas?
mrokkam
154 Posts
0
May 21st, 2009 09:00
- Go to Configure --> Create Virtual Disks or Disk Groups,
- Select Unconfigured Capacity (and disk type if you have that option)
- Select Manual
- Select RAID 5
- Select and add all the disks you want to add to the disk group
- Click on calculate capacity
- If you have 1st generation firmware (Version starts with 06.xx.xx.xx),
Type in the Virtual Disk capacity that you want to use.(The disk group is automatically created and initialized)
- If you have 2nd generation firmware (Version starts with 07.xx.xx.xx)
Click on Finish to finish creating and initializing the disk group.
Select Create a Virtual Disk using the new disk group
Type in the Virtual Disk capacity that you want to use
- Map the VD appropriately
You can get your version info by clicking on Support-->Storage Array Profile --> Summary Tab --> under the Current Configuration heading.
phil_couto
9 Posts
0
May 21st, 2009 10:00
Great. Thanks.
One more question. In terms of performance for a Virtual Machine, what is better?
I'm creating a File Server with four Drives/Shares. It will be a VM. What setup is better?
1. Disk Group 558.GB VM on same Disk Group/LUN and within the VM create four drives(VMDK files) and use each drive as a share.
2. Disk Group 558GB. Create the VM on same Disk Group and create separate Virtual DIsks(LUNS) and attached them via iSCSI individually to the VM.
Thanks in advance!
Dev Mgr
4 Operator
4 Operator
•
9.3K Posts
0
May 21st, 2009 13:00
Performance wise I don't think it'll make much of a difference, however, option 1 is easier to manage, and option 2 allows you to use the MD3000i's snapshot features (assuming you purchased the license to enable this capability) and present a snapshot of the RDM to a backup server.
phil_couto
9 Posts
0
May 21st, 2009 15:00
Great. Thanks again for all your help!
Phil
mrokkam
154 Posts
0
May 21st, 2009 16:00
Here is a link that kinda explores the same
http://vmetc.com/2009/04/13/use-rdms-for-practical-reasons-and-not-performance-reasons/
I did hear that the using the VM file system had a higher IO overhead but that might not be the case any more as the blog above mentions.
- Mohan