Storage Scenario question - Storage

This is a discussion on Storage Scenario question - Storage ; Hi, We are running a few websites (Windows 2003 Web Edition) with increasing storage needs due to the sites offering client upload/document storage facilities. These storage needs have got to the point now where we have decided to purchase a ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Storage Scenario question

  1. Storage Scenario question

    Hi,

    We are running a few websites (Windows 2003 Web Edition) with increasing
    storage needs due to the sites offering client upload/document storage
    facilities. These storage needs have got to the point now where we have
    decided to purchase a couple of NAS servers running Windows Storage Server
    2003. I would like to link the IIS websites directly to allocated space on
    one of the NAS servers and the other one being a replica of this. Can
    someone recommend a best practise for this - I am currently thinking of
    using DFS and making use of the FRS to create copies on the other NAS
    server. Alongside this I will probably implement some Shadow Copies for
    further redundancy. Do you think that this is a realistic solution for a web
    based situation (or would I be better looking at something like NSI
    Software's Double-Take to replicate data)? Also, with regards to the Shadow
    Copies, the server itself is 4 physical disks (RAID 5) configured as 2
    volumes (1 small volume for operating system and the rest for client data
    storage) - would it be ok to store the shadow copies on this larger volume
    or would it reduce performance? (Maybe I should create another volume for
    the Shadow Copies?).

    Many thanks for any responses,

    Jay Collen
    ------------



  2. Re: Storage Scenario question

    Jay,

    You have several options.

    First, you can easilly point IIS at a virtual directory on the NAS device.
    For redundancy, you can use any replication product available (Third party
    or built in) to get the data on more than one server.

    Second, you could use more than one Web Edition server, each with it's own
    replicated data with the load balancing service in place, which would
    provide you with not only redundant copies of the data, but a redundant
    front end as well, in case you lose the web server itself.

    Third, you could use a nice combination of both. Having the redundant front
    end with the less expensive Web Edition and using the clusterable Storage
    Server on the back end.

    As for the Shadow Copies, certainly moving the VSS copies to another volume
    will help performance, so long as they reside on separate physical disks,
    not the same internal storage you are using already for the volume being
    copied. If you are only able to use the same disks, then keep it as one
    volume and the I/O subsystem will take less of beating due to disk
    contention.

    Hope this helps.

    jh


    "Jay Collen" wrote in message
    news:OrossWQNEHA.3192@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
    > Hi,
    >
    > We are running a few websites (Windows 2003 Web Edition) with increasing
    > storage needs due to the sites offering client upload/document storage
    > facilities. These storage needs have got to the point now where we have
    > decided to purchase a couple of NAS servers running Windows Storage Server
    > 2003. I would like to link the IIS websites directly to allocated space on
    > one of the NAS servers and the other one being a replica of this. Can
    > someone recommend a best practise for this - I am currently thinking of
    > using DFS and making use of the FRS to create copies on the other NAS
    > server. Alongside this I will probably implement some Shadow Copies for
    > further redundancy. Do you think that this is a realistic solution for a

    web
    > based situation (or would I be better looking at something like NSI
    > Software's Double-Take to replicate data)? Also, with regards to the

    Shadow
    > Copies, the server itself is 4 physical disks (RAID 5) configured as 2
    > volumes (1 small volume for operating system and the rest for client data
    > storage) - would it be ok to store the shadow copies on this larger volume
    > or would it reduce performance? (Maybe I should create another volume for
    > the Shadow Copies?).
    >
    > Many thanks for any responses,
    >
    > Jay Collen
    > ------------
    >
    >




+ Reply to Thread