UNSOLVED

awer1

updated

13 years ago

A

awer1

22 Posts

0

14789

June 24th, 2013 05:00

MD3000 storage connection

Hi,

Is it possible to connect two PowerEdge servers that each has 2 SAS 5/E controllers to MD3000 SAS storage?

thanks

  • DELL-Kenny K

    1 Rookie

    •

    685 Posts

    1059

    0

    Posted June 24th, 2013 12:00

     

    Yes, you can connect 2 host servers with Dual HBA's using redundant data paths with the MD3000. Below is the link for the user guide and it shows all of the cabling options and the one you need is on page 28.

     

    ftp://ftp.dell.com/Manuals/all-products/esuprt_ser_stor_net/esuprt_powervault/powervault-md3000_Owner%27s%20Manual_en-us.pdf

     

    If you need anything else please feel free to let me know.

  • awer1

    22 Posts

    1059

    0

    Posted June 24th, 2013 14:00

    And MD300 support active/active mode?

  • DELL-Kenny K

    1 Rookie

    •

    685 Posts

    1059

    1

    Posted June 24th, 2013 14:00

    They are considered as active/active in the fact that both controllers are powered on and communicating. However, only one controller at a time is used to transfer data as the the other controller is for MPIO.

  • Dev Mgr

    6 Operator

    •

    9308 Posts

    •

    3 Points

    1059

    0

    Posted June 25th, 2013 09:00

    An active/active SAN is typically a SAN that does IO to a given LUN/virtual disk via both controllers at the same time (e.g. EMC Symmetrix).

    With ALUA you get virtual active/active as both controllers accept the IO, but internally the IO will be forwarded to the controller than owns the virtual disk/LUN in question.

  • natip

    1 Rookie

    •

    89 Posts

    1059

    0

    Posted June 26th, 2013 00:00

    In this case we have 2 active controllers but only one of them serves the LUN and we can fully utilize just only that one controller which owns particular LUN?

    thanks

  • awer1

    22 Posts

    1059

    0

    Posted June 30th, 2013 14:00

    "They are considered as active/active in the fact that both controllers are powered on and communicating. However, only one controller at a time is used to transfer data as the the other controller is for MPIO."

    Isn't a limitation here as the the other controller is for MPIO?

    Thanks

  • Dev Mgr

    6 Operator

    •

    9308 Posts

    •

    3 Points

    1059

    0

    Posted July 1st, 2013 08:00

    MPIO really consists of 2 pieces; the actual multiple path usage and failover.

    The second controller is for failover (from a single virtual disk's point of view), the additional ports on a single controller are for running multiple paths to a single virtual disk. When using mutliple virtual disks they get split up between the 2 controllers to spread the load.

    Notes about 2 servers on the same SAN:

    - servers can only share the same SAN storage (virtual disks/LUNs) if they use a cluster-aware filesystem (e.g. VMFS or GFS) or they have some kind of locking mechanism in place to regulate the disk access (e.g. Microsoft cluster)

    - servers that do share the same disks all need to access the same raid controller or raid controllers (this isn't the case for all SANs (e.g. fully active/active SANs), but for most SANs this applies)