June 23, 2000 04:23 PM

Network-Attached Storage in an Exchange Environment

Rating: (0)
Windows IT Pro
InstantDoc ID #9018

When I was presenting some sessions at Microsoft Tech-Ed 2000 in Orlando the week before last, one question came up several times: Can I use network-attached storage (NAS) with Exchange Server? The topic warrants further discussion.

NAS technology is not all that new. Several vendors have been selling this technology for several years, and others have announced offerings that are in the works. However, the recent hype about storage area networks (SANs) seems to have also generated interest in NAS. SANs and NAS are often confused. In a nutshell, NAS is the implementation of a disk block protocol (e.g., SCSI) over a common network protocol, such as TCP/IP. Some implementations actually use common network file access protocols such as NFS. You might be familiar with Network Appliance’s Filer, an NAS product that lets servers access their storage over a LAN connection. Essentially, the Filer device is a storage cabinet with an embedded processor and a "lite" OS that exposes disk units to network-based clients (which are usually servers themselves). Clients that access NAS-based storage must also run some sort of redirector or client software that lets the OS see the NAS-based disk as locally attached storage. From this point, the application simply accesses NAS-based storage as if it were local to the server. The downside of NAS-based storage is that the data transfer burden is shifted from the storage bus (SCSI, fibre channel) to the network, and the overhead of the underlying transport protocol is added to storage data transfer.

Although effective for applications such as file serving and excellent in terms of centralized management or backup and restore, NAS presents some potential pitfalls for applications such as Exchange Server. Implementing a disk protocol over IP and a dedicated LAN is relatively effective for a file server, but SCSI over IP can’t deliver the high I/Os per second that Exchange Server demands when supporting large user loads. Because disk I/O is the key to Exchange Server performance, Microsoft officially does NOT support NAS with Exchange Server. However, many organizations use NAS for their Exchange deployments and are quite satisfied. These organizations usually tout the great management, heterogeneous host support, and disaster recovery capabilities that NAS can bring to Exchange environments.

For centralized Exchange deployments supporting small user populations (500 users or less), NAS can be a worthwhile alternative to direct or SAN-based storage. However, if you're concerned about performance for servers with large populations, or if the fact that Microsoft doesn't support NAS with Exchange is important to you, stick to a SAN-based alternative for your future storage needs.

ARTICLE TOOLS

Add a Comment

can i use NAS for an clustered environment

Anonymous User 2/18/2005 4:37:53 AM


Dave Adams of NetApps would like you to believe that GigE and FC have performance parity. Of course, when you sell a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Fibre Channel can be pushed to 90+% of its available bandwidth, and pushing it to 80% of its bandwith is a trivial task. Please show me a production environment where GigE is capable of 90+MB/s (not Mbit as noted by Mr. Adams) into a single host port!



Most vendors (EMC, Compaq, IBM, etc.) either support or are looking to support both SAN and NAS as well as direct attached SCSI and future variants. Beware of the vendor with a single solution, who wants to turn your problem into just another nail for their hammer.

William Frederick 5/21/2001 3:16:52 PM


Someone technical should vet technical articles. Mr. Cochran has some whopping inaccurate statements:
"In a nutshell, NAS is the implementation of a disk block protocol (e.g., SCSI) over a common network protocol, such as TCP/IP." - Actually, NAS operates at the file level only, typically via CIFS/NFS. It bears no relationship to SCSI.
"Clients that access NAS-based storage must also run some sort of redirector or client software that lets the OS see the NAS-based disk as locally attached storage." - NAS is NOT seen as locally attached storage, it is a mapped drive or in the case of NFS an exported mounted filesystem. As for needing a client to access NAS resources, this is just wrong. NT and UNIX/Linux can access NAS resources with no additional software whatsoever. Windows 2000 Mag needs some technical editors.

Jim Ames 2/6/2001 3:06:34 PM


A little more clarity regarding Microsoft's certification of NetApp for exchange seems to be required. Firstly, the reason that certification of NetApp filers for Exchange has not occured yet is that MS has neither the resources or funds allocated to certify anybody's (NetApp/Compaq/EMC/...) NAS technology. They have not specifically excluded NAS, they just haven't put a priority against this technology. Also remember that a NetApp filer implemented supporting Exchange means that MS has one less NT license revenued. Secondly, when talking to MS they acknowledge that NetApp filers and Exchange 5.0 (& 5.5) works fine (No problems at all). The current issue (and certification) relates to the change in database structure for Exchange 2000 and the integration with NetApp's SnapManager. Therefore the current versions of SnapManager support Exchange 5.0 and 5.5 and not Exchange 2000. Once SnapManager for Exchange 2000 is released this will not be a problem (watch this space!). MS has realised that for Exchange to scale, they need NetApp. NetApp and MS are now working closer than ever before, as both organisations have several joint objectives that they need to achieve ASAP. Thirdly, regarding performance, assume that NAS performs as well as SAN regardless of the underlying technology, (call GbE (125MBps) & FC-AL (100MBps) equal). NAS provides a huge amount of benefit to an organisation due to it's simplicity and open standards approach to connectivity. Other vendors new NAS products (Compaq/Sun) add testimony to this statement!. What makes NetApp unique is that it is a true appliance. It runs a dedicated micro-kernel not an Operating System (or even a cut down O/S). Think of the concept as follows; You use a toaster to make your toast for breakfast. Set the dial for how brown you would like to toast to be!, and out it pops. You could use an oven to cook the toast, although it would need manual intevention to cook both sides, and don't forget to take the toast out before it burns!. Basically use a dedicated device to do a single dedicated task. Don't use a multi-purpose device to achieve the same task because it will require more resources and management. Lastly, arguments over block level transfer vs. file level will last for as long as the current GbE vs FC-AL bandwidth performance equity remains. look to where the future lies. How much more bandwidth will you get out of a 10GbE Ethernet card (Installed in a NetApp filer in 5 minutes), vs. a FC-AL 2 card (Installed in a SAN in ? hours). Additional latency with iSCSI or encapsulated SCSI over IP translation won't cut the mustard. New open source protocols (e.g. VI and DAFS) will take us all to the next quantum leap in perfomance. Imagine Exchange 2000 data on a NetApp filer attached to multile Exchange servers connected via VI and DAFS.

Dave Adams 10/12/2000 2:32:24 AM


As others have pointed out here Jerry has shown a complete misunderstanding of NAS. The whole point of using file-sharing protocols over IP rather than block SCSI is to provide true data sharing and improved file i/o efficiency.

Data sharing is of course not an issue for an Exchange IS. File i/o efficiency however IS. An Exchange server running a "local" disk array using block SCSI as the data access protocol (whether over parallel SCSI or Fibre Channel), has to perform the management of the filesystem itself. As the operational load (# of users) and volume size scales, you start running into response time bottlenecks. Large enterprise Exchange admins are well aware of this.

The typical workarounds are to limit the size of mailboxes, and limit the number of users per Exchange server.

By offloading the file I/O to a NAS device (i.e. NetApp Filer, EMC Celerra, Auspex etc.), accessed via CIFS, each Exchange server can cope with a much larger number of users and dramatically larger databases. It takes far less CPU to manage a TCP/IP stack than to track file data blocks in a large filesystem. NAS devices typically use dedicated OS's that use their CPU more efficiently, and in the case of NetApp this is combined with a very efficient filesystem that can dramatically outperform NTFS under load.

To implement SCSI over IP as Jerry suggests WOULD be sheer lunacy. Unfortunately there are a companies working on doing this now, who are completely missing the point. So far however all NAS devices use CIFS and/or NFS as the data access protocol.

Alan McLachlan 10/4/2000 10:08:24 PM


So far no one has discussed clustering with NAS. Can MSCS actually work with a NAS ? Has anyone done it ?

Thayalam Pillai 9/27/2000 7:40:02 PM


I take issue with the statement that NAS devices implement a block I/O protocol over IP. They don't they are a file I/O protocol. Should somebody actually create a SCSI/IP protocol and design a NAS around that, then it would be a block protocol.

Nik Simpson 9/18/2000 1:23:31 PM


The other point to keep in mind when Microsoft say they do not support (or like) NAS technology is that at present a NAS box is a box that isn't running a Microsoft OS. It will be interesting to see if this view changes with the release of the Embedded NT based NAS solutions (such as Compaq have). These however may not perform as well as the purpose built filer OSs.

Quentin Smart 9/11/2000 10:15:09 PM


By chance would any writer here have information on how to setup Exchange and NAS and Which NAS products support this solution. Thanks in advance.

Stuart 9/8/2000 11:52:30 AM


I certainly understand the comments from faithful NetApps users and employees. The point that everyone seems to have missed in the article (my fault for not being clearer) is that Microsoft does NOT support NAS technology with Exchange (regardless of what block/file protocol is used).

Microsoft (Exchange Dev) did look at NAS technology with NetApp and worked with them on their solution. However, the fact that NetApp folks seem to forget is that Microsoft determined during that work to specifically withhold support for the use of NAS with Exchange - PERIOD. They have publicly stated this fact at conferences and other "official" platforms such as Tech Ed and MEC. Not my words, Microsoft's

That being said, believe it or not, I am not against the use of NAS technology with Exchange. I have talked to many organizations using NAS with Exchange who are quite happy with it. For most organizations, the choice will be one of whether or not they care about Microsoft support of their storage strategy for Exchange. Some do, some don't.

What is really needed is for NAS vendors to work closer with Microsoft to demostrate that NAS technology can be a suitable solution for Exchange and other applications. A performance benchmark showing comparable performance between a NAS and a SAN solution would be a great start. The more Microsoft is educated on this technology the more they will embrace it. This is particularly true of the Exchange development team.

JC

Jerry Cochran (Author) 9/7/2000 12:22:37 PM


You must log on before posting a comment.

Are you a new visitor? Register Here
Free Power Tools Brochure
Get Mark Minasi's 17-page guide today!



      

advertisement

GOOGLE LINKS
SPONSORED LINKS
FEATURED LINKS

White Papers

Your remote offices contain valuable electronic data – are they adequately protected? Learn how proven technologies can reliably and cost-effectively back up a branch office from a central location, in real time, to disk or tape, and even utilize existing backup solutions.

Downloads

PacketTrap IT is a comprehensive and affordable network management and application monitoring solution that solves problems associated with bandwidth, network and application performance, and connectivity. Gain insight into your network - try PacketTrapIT free for 21 days!

Web Seminars

IT administrators have to solve a myriad of problems. This web seminar outlines the ten most common systems management pains - including managing highly distributed systems and dealing with data theft/loss – and the best practices to address each.

eLearning Series

We bring the experts direct to you to share their real-world perspective and expertise. During each event, three sessions stream in real time, so you can learn, ask questions, and get solutions.
Upcoming event: Getting the Most with Exchange 2010 with Paul Robichaux

Subscribe to Windows IT Pro!

Windows is a trademark of the Microsoft group of companies. Windows IT Pro is used by Penton Media Inc. under license from owner.