macpiano
Contributor
Contributor

Server disk datastore vs SAN Datastore?

Jump to solution

I just got the SAN hooked up to the VM. I have about 3 TB of Datastore on the server itself and about 6 TB on the SAN.  I have the following questions.

1. The SAN is faster, more reliable, more redundant?

2. Of my less critcal servers I should put them maybe on the Server's datastore?

3. Don't use the Server's datastores at all?

thanks

0 Kudos
1 Solution

Accepted Solutions
AureusStone
Expert
Expert

Hi.

1. SAN is usually faster, more reliable and redundant assuming that it is configured well.

2. Local storage is not shared so DRS/HA will not work.  If you don't use/need those features then yeah that would work.

3. Really depends on your requirements.  You can always put things like ISOs on local storage.

View solution in original post

0 Kudos
3 Replies
AureusStone
Expert
Expert

Hi.

1. SAN is usually faster, more reliable and redundant assuming that it is configured well.

2. Local storage is not shared so DRS/HA will not work.  If you don't use/need those features then yeah that would work.

3. Really depends on your requirements.  You can always put things like ISOs on local storage.

0 Kudos
weinstein5
Immortal
Immortal

Also be aware if you are using ESXi 4 you can only access datastores that are 2 TB -512 B in size - so you will have to present your storage in chunks equal to or smaller than that size.

If you find this or any other answer useful please consider awarding points by marking the answer correct or helpful
0 Kudos
mcowger
Immortal
Immortal

2)  Not only will DRS/HA no work, but if you lose that server's disks, you lose all the VMs on it, permanently.

--Matt VCDX #52 blog.cowger.us
0 Kudos