VMware Cloud Community
Brandon7a
Contributor
Contributor
Jump to solution

Virtual Machine Size

We have LUNs that are 500 GB large and in RAID 5. What are the cons of creating LUNs 500 GB or more in a RAID 5? I'm thinking about creating an extent to add more space to it. We have a database virtual server that is about 250 GB on that LUN. We are using a CX300 Fibre Channel SAN with 2 HBA's in each ESX host.

0 Kudos
1 Solution

Accepted Solutions
msemon1
Expert
Expert
Jump to solution

It is ok to create LUN's that are more than 500GB with RAID5. Our SAN is a CX3 -80. We have some LUN's that are 1TB and 2TB. I agree with previous post in not creating extents. Just like in Windows with spanning volumes, if you lose an extent or volume you lose data. The larger LUN's may be prone to suffer some performance degredation and SCSI reservation issues because you have more VM's hosted on them. This is why VMware recommended a LUN size around 500-600GB. For the most part our 1-2TB LUN's have worked fine.

Mike

View solution in original post

0 Kudos
6 Replies
vmroyale
Immortal
Immortal
Jump to solution

Hello.

We have LUNs that are 500 GB large and in RAID 5. What are the cons of creating LUNs 500 GB or more in a RAID 5?

Sounds like one of them is running out of space and then having to add extents. Smiley Happy I would personally avoid the extent and just create a larger LUN and then move this database VM (and possibly others) over to that LUN. That or split the disks up in the virtual machine across multiple LUNs.

Good Luck!

Brian Atkinson | vExpert | VMTN Moderator | Author of "VCP5-DCV VMware Certified Professional-Data Center Virtualization on vSphere 5.5 Study Guide: VCP-550" | @vmroyale | http://vmroyale.com
msemon1
Expert
Expert
Jump to solution

It is ok to create LUN's that are more than 500GB with RAID5. Our SAN is a CX3 -80. We have some LUN's that are 1TB and 2TB. I agree with previous post in not creating extents. Just like in Windows with spanning volumes, if you lose an extent or volume you lose data. The larger LUN's may be prone to suffer some performance degredation and SCSI reservation issues because you have more VM's hosted on them. This is why VMware recommended a LUN size around 500-600GB. For the most part our 1-2TB LUN's have worked fine.

Mike

0 Kudos
Brandon7a
Contributor
Contributor
Jump to solution

What the cons of adding an extent? I didn't realize they were frowned upon.

0 Kudos
msemon1
Expert
Expert
Jump to solution

Data loss.

0 Kudos
khughes
Virtuoso
Virtuoso
Jump to solution

It's one of those things that "works" but no one really wants to use unless its a last resort. Like others said there is data loss that could happen, but also could get a little confusing to keep track of. It's cleaner and easier to manage to create a new LUN and move the data.

  • Kyle

-- Kyle "RParker wrote: I guess I was wrong, everything CAN be virtualized "
bggb29
Expert
Expert
Jump to solution

Yes data loss would be my fear also. Although not high on a san. You lose on lun and you will lose all data in both luns.

We have been running a san for 6 years and only have never lost a lun.

We have never used extents so I have no idea how san snapshots work on2 luns. Something to test at least in my opinion.

Create a larger lun and migrate the servers if you have space

0 Kudos