You do have 2 different virtual disks, right? One for each server?
Servers cannot share disk space on a SAN unless you cluster the servers. If you 'force' it, you will guaranteed run into data/filesystem corruption. This could be within seconds, minutes, hours or days, but it's guaranteed.
Assuming this requirement is met, do you have 1 raid controller with 2 ports (and each server connecting to it's own port) or 2 controllers (each with 1 or 2 ports) and each server to a different controller?
The reason I ask is that a virtual disk has an owner (raid controller) of the virtual disk. If your server is connected to one raid controller only and the disk is owned by the other controller, you may not be able to see the disk.
as Dev Mgr stated, if you are trying to access the same virtual disk (VD) from 2 separate hosts that are not clustered together, you are likely to run into data corruption issues. The device is equipped to handle data from a single host at a time. clustering them will allow the hosts to make sure that they do not conflict with each other. Is there any specific reason that you have configured it this way?
I presume that you are able to see the VD from the w2k3 host and have initialized it. Are you trying to initialize it a second time from the w2k8 box?
vainkop
3 Posts
0
April 7th, 2009 07:00
Server 1 has Dell SAS 5/E with sas 2 ports
&
Server 2 has Dell SAS 5/E with sas 2 ports
1 port of each server is connected to MD3000
Server 1 & Server 2 are in host group.
This host group is mapped to one virtual disk.
???
Dev Mgr
4 Operator
•
9.3K Posts
0
April 7th, 2009 07:00
You do have 2 different virtual disks, right? One for each server?
Servers cannot share disk space on a SAN unless you cluster the servers. If you 'force' it, you will guaranteed run into data/filesystem corruption. This could be within seconds, minutes, hours or days, but it's guaranteed.
Assuming this requirement is met, do you have 1 raid controller with 2 ports (and each server connecting to it's own port) or 2 controllers (each with 1 or 2 ports) and each server to a different controller?
The reason I ask is that a virtual disk has an owner (raid controller) of the virtual disk. If your server is connected to one raid controller only and the disk is owned by the other controller, you may not be able to see the disk.
mrokkam
154 Posts
0
April 7th, 2009 10:00
hey vainkop,
as Dev Mgr stated, if you are trying to access the same virtual disk (VD) from 2 separate hosts that are not clustered together, you are likely to run into data corruption issues. The device is equipped to handle data from a single host at a time. clustering them will allow the hosts to make sure that they do not conflict with each other. Is there any specific reason that you have configured it this way?
I presume that you are able to see the VD from the w2k3 host and have initialized it. Are you trying to initialize it a second time from the w2k8 box?
vainkop
3 Posts
0
April 7th, 2009 12:00
Dear mrokkam & others, I do have "specific reasons that I have configured it this way".
I tried to initialize md3000 from win2k8 box, am I doing smth wrong?
What should I do to see the same disk as in Win2k3 in Win2k8 at last???!!!
Dev Mgr
4 Operator
•
9.3K Posts
0
April 7th, 2009 14:00
You destroy your host group, give the disk to 1 server, and make a Windows share and then map the other server to that share.