Shared volume (LUN) on many server, without cluster?

All Replies

• Monday, February 22, 2010 5:29 AM

   

   
  

  0
  When you assign a LUN from a SAN to your machine (or multiple machine), your machine sees it as a local storage and owns it. You can assign a single LUN to different machine, but when both machines wants to write at the same time (imagine yourself what could happen), there is maximum possibilities that your data will get corrupted.
  
  we usually assign the LUN (considering your case where a single LUN is subject to a central storage) in a machine and then share it and then access the share with as many hosts you want.
  

  • Proposed As Answer by AAKIB Monday, February 22, 2010 5:30 AM
  • Unproposed As Answer by _Matthias_ Monday, February 22, 2010 5:54 AM
  •  
  • Reply
  • Quote

   
• Monday, February 22, 2010 6:03 AM

   

   
  

  0
  Hello AAKIB,
  
  many thanks for your answer, but i donn't solved my problem.
  
  

  • You can assign a single LUN to different machine, but when both machines wants to write at the same time (imagine yourself what could happen), there is maximum possibilities that your data will get corrupted.

  That is a good warning from you.. I doesn't know it before. Can you explain me the backgrounds of your statemant, please?
  
  
  

  • we usually assign the LUN (considering your case where a single LUN is subject to a central storage) in a machine and then share it and then access the share with as many hosts you want.

  That was my first idea, but I create a single-point-of-failure with them. The second problem is the speed: FibreChanel over seppeate fibres a many faster as LAN.
  
  
  Do you have other Solutions for me?
  
  Best regards
  _Matthias_
  • Reply
  • Quote

   
• Monday, February 22, 2010 6:34 AM

   

   
  

  0
  Dear _Matthias_,
  You can assign a single LUN in two (or multiple) host, if you assure one will always write and another will read always. Otherwise NO
  I can not answer for other OS, but for Windows you cannot barely assign a single LUN to more than one host (physically you can, but you will suffer)
  
  Better you give me asnwer when one of your host intents to write something and locks the drive and at the same time the other host tries to do the same thing...what will happen ?? I can't give you much technical jargons on it but at least with common sense, you can imagine its not worthy thinking.
  
  
  Windows based servers always attempts to write volume labels (& some other things i beleive) to all available LUN's. This can render the LUN's unusable by other operating systems (in other hosts) and can result in data loss.
  
  For your speed concern, use FC card for all the servers you need to have access to that LUN via a shared host.
  

  • Marked As Answer by Mervyn ZhangModerator Friday, February 26, 2010 7:12 AM
  •  
  • Reply
  • Quote

   
• Wednesday, July 18, 2012 9:13 AM

   

   
  

  0

  we usually assign the LUN (considering your case where a single LUN is subject to a central storage) in a machine and then share it and then access the share with as many hosts you want.
  ...
  For your speed concern, use FC card for all the servers you need to have access to that LUN via a shared host.
  

  Dear AAKIB,

  Can you describe this in more detail? Especially how to setup sharing across FC.

  • Reply
  • Quote

   
• Wednesday, July 18, 2012 5:44 PM

   

   
  

  0

  Hello community,
  
  is it possible to attach a LUN (from Hitachi-SAN-Fabric) on many W2k8R2-Servers?
  I have a large central LUN (with 1TB datas) there connected by FibreChanel. This LUN will I attach to 12 Terminal-Server for readonly access. Only one Servers will do writing-opperations to this LUN.
  
  Is a possible way know, that i can use the datas without Cluster or DFS? The SAN-fabric do support that i link one LUN to some servers.
  
  Forward I thank your formany answers.
  
  Best Regards
  
  _Matthias_

  You need to have either a clustered file systems (for Windows it's SFS from DataPlow and MelioFS from SANbolic) or use distributed lock manager like the one Tiger Technology sells. MetaSAN in your case (FC). For a clarification why you cannot do it with NTFS alone please read this thread:

  http://www.starwindsoftware.com/forums/starwind-f5/trying-clear-this-use-iscsi-instead-smb-t1392.html

  Ignore StarWind as concept is pretty much the same for EVERY SAN on planet :)

  -nismo

  • Proposed As Answer by VR38DETTMicrosoft Community Contributor Wednesday, July 18, 2012 5:44 PM
  •  
  • Reply
  • Quote