Naming strategy for volumes & datastores

[Thushyaa]

Hello,

I am looking for some standard way of naming the volumes & data-stores when creating and attaching to esx host, I have lefthand and equal-logic iscsi storage with two sites, and 9 esx host in each sites.

naming at volume creation time in storage nodes / cluster node.

naming at when adding the data-store from volumes to esxi hosts.

Thanks in advance - all inputs are welcome .

[amvmware]

For datastores i found generic names such as datastore1, datastore2 ..etc was limited in its usefulness. I use a naming scheme based on the size of the VMDK's that i have allowed to be hosted on that datastore - so DS1-50-100, means Datastore 1 with 100Gb and or 50Gb VMDK's.

[jasoncllsystems]

My Suggestion:

Fibre Channel

FC-R5-01 (RAID5)

FC-R10-01 (RAID10)

ISCSI

ISCSI-R5-01 (RAID5)

ISCSI-R10-01 (RAID10)

Regards,

jlchannel

MALAYSIA VMware Communities

http://www.malaysiavm.com

'If you found this or any other answer useful please consider allocating points for helpful or correct answers ***

[petedr]

I have seen many people do it similar to what has been posted using type of storage, size, raid level and maybe a unique nunber as part of the name.

www.phdvirtual.com, makers of PHD Virtual Backup for Vmware and Xen Server, formally esXpress

[Dr_Virt]

We utilize the following

[storage speed][purpose][number]

Storage type is a single character: S = SAN, N=NFS, L=Local Storage (Host)

Storage speed: We only run two tiers, so it is HS = 15K FC, LS = 7K SATA

Purpose: OS=Operating System, DB=SQL, GN=General, FS=File Systems (DFS), UN=Unique (RDM), etc.

Number: LUN Number

For example:

1) SHSOS01 = SAN, High Speed, Operating Systems, LUN 01

2) LLSGN02 = Local Storage, Low Speed, General Use, Volume 02

[FredPeterson]

I like this, but I'd suggest putting dashes between the designators to make it a bit more clear. To the initiators of the scheme its easy to see and read and understand and perhaps thats all that matters.

When I started out I got in a bad rut of a too generic name and realize going forward I need a better naming convention. I've left the local storages with their original names.

[AndreTheGiant]

I also add an information to match the naming on storage side.

On FC storage I usually add the LUN ID on datastore name.

On iSCSI storage, in most cases, you can simple use the LUN/Volume name.

Andre

[PduPreez]

My 2 cents

It all depends on what you want to know from looking at the Datastore name. (Site, Storage, Type, Size, Raid, ID, Role, ect)

The key is to use the same name on your storage side as on your Datastore side for ease of administration

Regards

If you find this or any other answer useful please consider awarding points by marking the answer helpful or correct. Thank you.

[Iwan_Rahabok]

I guess there is no right or wrong

Personally, I'd go by the function/purpose (as opposed to the technical characteristic).

Normally, I'd recommend 3 tier (Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3). Each Tier has their own technical characteristic, which don't need to be part of the Datastore name (but should be part of the Device or LUN name).

For special purpose, I'd just name them as I'd only have a few of them. Examples are:

• Templates. This is normally an NFS, 1 TB SATA, just to store templates/ISO.

• Isolated. This is for troubleshooting purpose, where I need 1 VM on 1 DS. Useful when storage team does not own Datastore (which they should)

RDM will naturally have their own naming convention