• I'm sorry if some things weren't clear. Let me explain a little. I love the snapshot technology - especially for large databases. The backup and restores can be lightening fast. There is also the option of using cloning where you can setup a copy of a database without taking up any additional space on the server (though it is still taking up space on the backend datastore). In addition, this database could be 2 TB in size but could be presented almost instantaneously.

    My point though is that even though the snapshot technology is fantastic the SMSQL tool was built by people who know storage but don't have any clue what it is like to be a DBA managing a large number of SQL Servers. NetApp isn't the only culprit. Others include Avamar, SyncSort and more. Storage teams love these tools because the tools leverage storage technology. But these tools are a nightmare for DBAs to manage and use. It really is a square peg in a round hole.

    Case in point. As I've mentioned before SMSQL gets all its configuration from flat files (I wish I could tell you where these are located but they should be somewhere in the initial install directory). Now, if you look at every database management tool (Idera, Quest, Redgate) they all use database repositories. Why? Because they know its fast, good design and allows for each DBA to install a client on their local workstation for management. How do they know this? They have DBAs working on the tools. NetApp knows this because I've talk to their product development team. Will they make a change? Probably not. Why? Because they're focused on storage not DBAs and it probably isn't cost-effective for them to rewrite the application to please DBAs.

    I also had a conversation with their product development team about adding and removing databases and updating the configuration. Initially, they were very defensive but eventually admitted it was a limitation and they would work on it.

    So, in summary, because the snapshot technology is so good I would continue to recommend it if you are only managing 10 or so systems. Any more than that and you'll want to reconsider. Ideally, I would only recommend it for systems that have 1 or 2 very large databases (> 500 GB), systems that do not change frequently (add or remove databases), and systems that can have dedicated LUNS for the datafiles (no application files on the same LUNs). Quiescing is required which is why your system databases have to be separate and can't be part of a snapshot but quiescing also requires a lot of configuration planning up front.

    I've talked extensively about this in my mssqltips posts: http://www.mssqltips.com/sqlserverauthor/55/scott-shaw/

    Again, sorry for any confusions. I really hope NetApp gets their act together or maybe one of the other vendors like Idera can work with NetApp to implement the snapshot technology into their backup tools. That would be cool.

    Scott