Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
AskSQLTeam
Ask SQLTeam Question
0 Posts |
 Posted - 2005-05-11 : 07:32:32
|
| Mike writes "We are running out of space on our server. We need additional room for a very large database. Does the Enterprise Manager see an attached external storage device like a Buffalo TeraStation or LaCie F800 as a local disk? Put another way, can we put the database on the attached drive and manage it from Enterprise Manager? If not, what are our options? Thanks." |
|
|
mr_mist
Grunnio
1870 Posts |
Posted - 2005-05-11 : 08:58:57
|
| It depends more upon how your device is presented to the OS. EG If it shows up in explorer as a local disk then SQL Server will see it as such. If it's SAN storage and your server is part of a cluster then it would have to be listed as a dependant resource for the sql server thingy.-------Moo. :) |
 |
|
|
MichaelP
Jedi Yak
2489 Posts |
Posted - 2005-05-11 : 11:31:15
|
| I think you probably could, but I'm not sure that I'd put a SQL Server database on an external storage device. I think you will run into performance and reliability issues. Generally, those types of drives are not designed to be running at 100% 24x7. Keep that in mind when exploring this option. Also keep in mind that Windows will need to see those drives BEFORE SQL Server starts, or it's going to be unhappy.IMHO, I'd not try to do this. If you data is important, I'd find a better solution (IE Bigger server with more drive bays, External SCSI Attached drives, SAN, etc)Michael<Yoda>Use the Search page you must. Find the answer you will.</Yoda> |
|
|
|
mikeccmike
Starting Member
2 Posts |
Posted - 2005-05-11 : 14:33:07
|
I should have added this database is a history, that is, the data will never change, there's no data entry, no updating. It is static. The only use it will ever have is as a history. Does that change your view? I'm new at SQL server and I'm not an IT pro so I may not be stating this correctly, but, what I was getting at in my previous message is that I don't understand how the Enterprise Manager could see network attached storage as a local disk, and doesn't the disk the database is on have to be local in order to manage and use the database with SQL server?quote:
Originally posted by MichaelP
I think you probably could, but I'm not sure that I'd put a SQL Server database on an external storage device. I think you will run into performance and reliability issues. Generally, those types of drives are not designed to be running at 100% 24x7. Keep that in mind when exploring this option. Also keep in mind that Windows will need to see those drives BEFORE SQL Server starts, or it's going to be unhappy.IMHO, I'd not try to do this. If you data is important, I'd find a better solution (IE Bigger server with more drive bays, External SCSI Attached drives, SAN, etc)Michael<Yoda>Use the Search page you must. Find the answer you will.</Yoda>
|
|
|
|
MichaelP
Jedi Yak
2489 Posts |
Posted - 2005-05-11 : 17:32:32
|
| You didn't say NAS before. I thought those devices were just big external USB drives plugged directly into the server.You might be able to use the NAS if you map a drive to a share on the NAS that contains this read-only data. I'd be sure to put the database into read-only mode just in case though. I don't feel comfortable telling you to try this, but I think it might work. I think this is one of those "it will work but I really suggest against it" type things.Michael<Yoda>Use the Search page you must. Find the answer you will.</Yoda> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enterprise Manager and attached storage