- #VMWARE VSPHERE 6.5 VMDK FILE SIZE LIMIT HOW TO#
- #VMWARE VSPHERE 6.5 VMDK FILE SIZE LIMIT SOFTWARE#
- #VMWARE VSPHERE 6.5 VMDK FILE SIZE LIMIT ZIP#
- #VMWARE VSPHERE 6.5 VMDK FILE SIZE LIMIT WINDOWS#
However, I used this method dozens of times.
#VMWARE VSPHERE 6.5 VMDK FILE SIZE LIMIT HOW TO#
This guide is not an officially supported solution on how to reduce the size of vmdk disks in VMWare. The pressure also needs to be on VMWare to remove limitations that seem to be there for no reason.Important. I have a business application where it is not unusual to have a single folder over 2TB with 10s of thousand of files. It's not individual files, it's entire folders. The past 5 years, I've been using physical servers with large RAID arrays. Since there ARE people like you that seem to want this functionality. The pressure should be on Veeam, Quest to allow backups for RDM. They give you RDM and NFS, why the insistance to use VMDK on BLOCK datastores, when there ARE alternatives.
but those are no on block level storage either, so I think you are forgetting this isn't limited to VM Ware. Other than virtualization, where else do you see 2TB files? Databases MAYBE. It's probably an addressable space problem in memory or the file system.
#VMWARE VSPHERE 6.5 VMDK FILE SIZE LIMIT ZIP#
I am sure there is some technical problem with files that big, just like ZIP files can't be over a certain size either.
So what were you doing for the last 5 years?!? This isn't new, and the limitation is for files. Seems to me that supporting large LUNs is almost worthless if I can't use them. Is there a time frame for VMWare to support VMDKs larger than 2TB? I have folders that are larger than 2TB and they can't be broken up. One has a 4TB datastore and the other a 8TB datastore. I have 2 servers that I want to virtualize. In this case, don't let the SAN affect your judgement because you think it won't be adequate for responsiveness, it will. Users will not be affected by the performance or lack thereof, if you have the space, use it. A file serer is just a bunch of files that people use to install, make copies, backup, or share between departments. I agree that you want to use local disks and not waste "high performance" SAN drives for File Server, I have the same reservations.Īll I am saying is that for your purposes, you shouldn't be concerned with how bad or what kind of configuration you have on the SAN, it may not compare with OTHER high performance solutions (like local disk) on the SAN for database use. Performance issues asside, your SAN should be fine for file server. If nothing else is touching those disks nothing else can affect performance of those disks, right? right? So you can configure disks to be separate from OTHER disks. What I don't agree with is your assessment of the performance of the SAN.
OK, so we are agree with the size limitation. The only reason I would go with 2 is much faster to fix my file-1 which almost is running out of space on 2TB volume so would be easy to just add another vmdk and expand it.
#VMWARE VSPHERE 6.5 VMDK FILE SIZE LIMIT WINDOWS#
Windows dynamic disk spann 2 vmdks of 2TB which will give me 4TB good enought for couple of years from now. and other loads.īut yeah in the end I`ll just have to decide betweenĢ. That`s the reason of our second file server as our first server is slow cuz of the slow SAN. But with this new server will be able to push with quad nics about 400MB/s both read and write seqencial. From our SAN currently under load we don`t get more than 50MB/s read and 130MB/write. We achive very high seq read /write perf over 700MB/s with cache. I prefer to see a server there in case my SAN blows out I still have all the data on a local server. yeah that makes sense but no we don`t want our second file server to be located on any SANs as we don`t have much performance out of them.they are used for other things. So individual VMDK is better than trying to RAID them. 1 BIG VMDK vs multiples running across smaller VMDK (RAID) amounts to the same thing.
#VMWARE VSPHERE 6.5 VMDK FILE SIZE LIMIT SOFTWARE#
If you lose a VMDK you can't restore / use a software RAID until you get back ALL the VMDK's either. A typical file server has multiple shares, so split the shares / files across the different VMDK. I guess if you MUST have a RAID then that's one thing, but a File Server should need a RAID first of all. A Software RAID is just not a good idea on any OS. The loss of a VMDK has nothing to do with fear of losing 1 VMDK, it has to do with performance and stability. In fact, if you did lose 1 vmdk the recovery window would be shorter than restoring that 1 giant vmdk. I don't think the feer of losing 1 vmdk from a set would be any different from losing 1 giant vmdk. If you must stay with local storage, then go ahead and use multiple vmdks with a software raid. You'll be missing out in host redundancy, centralized storage w/ backup controllers, load balancing and possible DR replication. I would recommend against using local storage for your file server and move to a SAN or NAS environment.
0 kommentar(er)
