Comments on: Enterprise Computing: LUN Sizing and Standards http://thestoragearchitect.com/2009/11/24/enterprise-computing-lun-sizing-and-standards/ Storage, Virtualisation & Cloud Fri, 10 Feb 2012 17:47:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Chris Evans http://thestoragearchitect.com/2009/11/24/enterprise-computing-lun-sizing-and-standards/#comment-1098 Chris Evans Thu, 03 Dec 2009 09:12:52 +0000 http://thestoragearchitect.com/?p=914#comment-1098 Alex I agree that over time, as drive sizes increase, LUN sizes will too. That should be part of the process. However this change should only occur infrequently and can be tied into a BAU storage replacement process. Regards Chris Alex

I agree that over time, as drive sizes increase, LUN sizes will too. That should be part of the process. However this change should only occur infrequently and can be tied into a BAU storage replacement process.

Regards
Chris

]]> By: Alex http://thestoragearchitect.com/2009/11/24/enterprise-computing-lun-sizing-and-standards/#comment-1097 Alex Thu, 03 Dec 2009 06:16:17 +0000 http://thestoragearchitect.com/?p=914#comment-1097 Great idea!! , although you need to consider the size on drives that are changing constantly, which force sometimes choose different partition sizes. Regards Alex Great idea!! , although you need to consider the size on drives that are changing constantly, which force sometimes choose different partition sizes.
Regards

Alex

]]> By: Ron Major http://thestoragearchitect.com/2009/11/24/enterprise-computing-lun-sizing-and-standards/#comment-1096 Ron Major Tue, 01 Dec 2009 13:14:01 +0000 http://thestoragearchitect.com/?p=914#comment-1096 I agree. Standard LU sizes simplify not only storage migrations, but also storage allocations and reallocations. I can list many other reasons. I tried to implement standard LU sizes four years ago between our enterprise and modular arrays, but was unsuccessful due to an incompatibility with an older enterprise frame. By the time I discovered this, the migration was well underway and thus too late to correct. The time now has come to replace all of our storage arrays and this time I will be setting a standard LU size. Yes, it may be a pain, but the benefits are too numerous. I agree. Standard LU sizes simplify not only storage migrations, but also storage allocations and reallocations. I can list many other reasons. I tried to implement standard LU sizes four years ago between our enterprise and modular arrays, but was unsuccessful due to an incompatibility with an older enterprise frame. By the time I discovered this, the migration was well underway and thus too late to correct. The time now has come to replace all of our storage arrays and this time I will be setting a standard LU size. Yes, it may be a pain, but the benefits are too numerous.

]]> By: Chris Evans http://thestoragearchitect.com/2009/11/24/enterprise-computing-lun-sizing-and-standards/#comment-1095 Chris Evans Thu, 26 Nov 2009 12:35:06 +0000 http://thestoragearchitect.com/?p=914#comment-1095 Tzvika LUN sizes don't need to change with Thin Provisioning; the thinness factor just has an affect on how pools of disks are managed. I'm referring to the size of the LUN as the host sees it. Chris Tzvika

LUN sizes don’t need to change with Thin Provisioning; the thinness factor just has an affect on how pools of disks are managed. I’m referring to the size of the LUN as the host sees it.

Chris

]]> By: Tzvika Barenholz http://thestoragearchitect.com/2009/11/24/enterprise-computing-lun-sizing-and-standards/#comment-1094 Tzvika Barenholz Wed, 25 Nov 2009 06:57:46 +0000 http://thestoragearchitect.com/?p=914#comment-1094 This is solid advice, for enabling heterogeneous replication and also for avoiding fragmentation when LUNs get decommissioned. I wonder how you square it with virtual or "thin" provisioning: is it still one consistent size across the organization only that it now consists of two sizes, the starting allocated size and the max? This is solid advice, for enabling heterogeneous replication and also for avoiding fragmentation when LUNs get decommissioned.

I wonder how you square it with virtual or “thin” provisioning: is it still one consistent size across the organization only that it now consists of two sizes, the starting allocated size and the max?

]]>