Server 2016 File Storage Question

[dcwhitworth]

We're about to migrate from VMWare/2012R2/CC4 to HyperV/2016. We've used an external company to get the new domain and servers all set up for us and I'm a bit concerned about the file storage structure.

 

All user home areas and all file storage areas are located on one drive (2TB default, going to need expanding when we migrate) of one server that is dedicated to the task of file storage.

 

I don't know much about ways of setting up VMs for optimal storage performance, but having everything on one drive on one server just doesn't *feel* right to me.

 

Can anyone offer me advice or failing that opinions ?

 

Thanks

[kmount]

Hard to be sure without some further context but that does seem an odd design decision.

[dcwhitworth]

Hard to be sure without some further context but that does seem an odd design decision.

 

What sort of context would be helpful ? We've got about 1500 users and probably around 4TB of data.

[kmount]

That helps

 

If it was me I'd have broken down the roles and data differently - a simple split is staff/students, or homes/profiles in terms of servers would have been a starting point for discussion during discovery of the data requirement.

 

I'd ask them why they went for a single big file server, being VMs you can carve up the workload and split out the software fault domains i.e. so a file server holding staff having a problem doesn't hurt students, etc.

 

What did you agree to in the design? They may well have a reason for going about it this way, I'd ask them before you put anything into it though as moving later is harder work.

[dcwhitworth]

Thanks for your input. I've run the setup past our new support service and the guy seemed pretty OK with it.

 

The brief I gave the installers was fairly loose, it was more or less, build me a Windows domain for this many PCs and this many users. Yes I was asking about this now before we'd committed anything much to the server.

[Norphy]

I'd ask them why they went for a single big file server, being VMs you can carve up the workload and split out the software fault domains i.e. so a file server holding staff having a problem doesn't hurt students.

 

Without laying hands on the hardware, it sounds to me that they might be using the file server in a kind of SAN-lite arrangement.

 

Have multiple virtual hosts with minimal to no storage then have some SMB shares sitting on a file server to host the actual VHDXs. Thos protects against hardware failure on your hosts and allows you to load balance across them. This is a supported config with SMBv3 and Win 2012 onwards. My only slight reservation would be that using a Windows server for VM storage might not be as effective at the task as “real” storage device such as a SAN is and it almost certainly won’t be as redundant.

 

/edit you don’t mean that everything is stored on one 2tb spindle do you? If so, that’s a whole heap of fail just there. Performance will be awful and there will be no redundancy whatsoever. Can you give us an inventory of the hardware that you’re being provided?

Edited March 27, 2018 by Norphy

[dcwhitworth]

Without laying hands on the hardware, it sounds to me that they might be using the file server in a kind of SAN-lite arrangement.

 

Have multiple virtual hosts with minimal to no storage then have some SMB shares sitting on a file server to host the actual VHDXs. Thos protects against hardware failure on your hosts and allows you to load balance across them. This is a supported config with SMBv3 and Win 2012 onwards. My only slight reservation would be that using a Windows server for VM storage might not be as effective at the task as “real” storage device such as a SAN is and it almost certainly won’t be as redundant.

 

/edit you don’t mean that everything is stored on one 2tb spindle do you? If so, that’s a whole heap of fail just there. Performance will be awful and there will be no redundancy whatsoever. Can you give us an inventory of the hardware that you’re being provided?

 

This is all on a Dell VRTx chassis with two blades so proper hardware and SAN set up. I can assure you if it was all on one physical disk I wouldn't be posting here for advice, I'd be making some nasty phone calls !

[Norphy]

I admit that I don’t have experience of the VTRX platform but with other similar hyperconverged systems that I’ve seen, all of the nodes in the chassis have direct block access to the storage, either by iSCSI or over SAS. I’m happy to be corrected but I’d be surprised if this isn’t the case with the VTRX as well.

 

If there’s a single 2TB volume, that’s fine. As long as it’s set up with a GPT volume, you can go bigger and NTFS or ReFS will support volumes that size or much larger.

 

Additionally, according to my Dell account manager, the VTRX is going EOL so I’d be contacting them back and asking for something newer.

Edited March 27, 2018 by Norphy

[sluggster66]

VRTX isn't hyperconveged, it's DAS with nodes attached similar to a typical SAN setup. Everything in 1 chassis, so still a IPOD type design.

 

 

I would personally split the student and staff data

[dcwhitworth]

 

Additionally, according to my Dell account manager, the VTRX is going EOL so I’d be contacting them back and asking for something newer.

 

Have you got any kind of a reference for that or just what they've told you ?

[Norphy]

No, just what they told me.

[MYK-IT]

Although your current (single) file server is 2TB (which 'may' either be from a P2V (Physical to Virtual) conversation, or by setting-up a new virtualised (file) server) you now (presumably) have a 2-node Hyper-V configuration with x TB of data set up as CSV (cluster shared volumes) giving your High Availability.

 

Therefore, there is nothing stopping you creating additional CSVs, of required data size, combined with creating additional virtualised (file) servers to allow you to manage / store your School's data as you seem fit.

 

(We have VRTX & blade servers setup too btw).

 

Update

As far as Dell VRTX going EOL, at a Dell Education Roadshow last week, they were still showcasing them, with not even a mention / hint of this rumour. And to be honest, if this (or any) product does what you need it to do, and you have suitable / required support contract (we have 4hrs ProSupport) in place (if needed), then I don't see it as an issue at all. In your case, it's not, as you are just querying how it has been setup - not the limitation of the product / VRTX).

Edited March 28, 2018 by MYK-IT