|
Does anyone have any experience dealing with large local disks in ESX? I've been reading about issues with virtual disks larger than 2TB and I'm not really sure how to handle this. I have a single host with 12 900GB drives and I don't know how to handle it in a way that's both redundant and plays well with ESX without losing a ton of disk in the process.
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2012 21:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 22:45 |
|
|
Mierdaan posted:Can I ask what you want to use that much local disk for anyway? Just curious. We've got a deal where we can get individual machines and lots of disk pretty cheap, to the point where it's way more economical than network storage. 1000101 posted:ESXi 5.X supports SCSI devices over 2TB though individual virtual disks are still limited to 2TB-512B. Do you know where I can read about setting up extents? This is a new concept for me. I'm not sure if I do something with a single or multiple virtual disks and then install or what. The real key for me is getting a setup with both some kind of redundancy and using as much disk as I can. We're big on burning a candle at both ends and then wondering why it melted.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2012 00:12
|
|
|
1000101 posted:
Awesome, thank you. I have a ton of local disk and I'd like it to show up as a single data store. I'm not concerned with any VMDKs getting over 2TB (nothing should get any larger than 1, if that). Posting from my phone right now, but I'll look at the doc you posted when I get to work as well. Thanks again! EDIT: I forgot to mention, I need to use ESXi 4.1 for this. We'd lose too much memory with the memory limitation in 5. Is this still possible? nahanahs fucked around with this message at 13:27 on Jun 4, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2012 12:42
|
|
|
Rhymenoserous posted:Roll your own SAN/NAS by getting an individual machine with lots of disk. The situation I'm currently dealing with is a single host with lots of disk.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2012 14:09
|
|