Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations bkrike on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Basic vs Dynamic Disk
- Thread starter stunpals
- Start date
bofhrevenge2
MIS
That's correct and yes you should be aware that software RAID can add quite alot of load to your servers, if it's just a small file server then it should be ok but any critical busy server should use hardware RAID.
"Sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar." - Sigmund Freud
"Sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar." - Sigmund Freud
Agree with Bofhrevenge...
For a simple mirror on a non stressed server, raid 1 via the Windows Os implementation is OK. On small system servers I have used it for years, no problems should occur if done correctly
I would recommend placing the drives on two scsi adapters (duplexing) as it is slightly safer and faster. Both adapter need to be exactly the same make, model and have the same firmware/ drivers, as I have seen problems otherwise. Which bring to the point, with the cost of 2 sci adapters, you would be in the range of a high quality dual channel raid adapter. Throughput with OS or hardware raid 1 are similar
For raid 5 I would not even consider OS based implementation
Aside from the overhead, due to the motherboard managing I/O, the CPU overhead involved with parity creation, it would require using Dynamic disks, adding another possible point of failure. High quality hardware raids offload the the CPU/motherboard processing of >25% for a raid 5 system, 25% more CPU power is considerable. OS coruption can affect Dynamic disk,; sometimes resurection is possible with great effort, other times it leads to disaster.
For a simple mirror on a non stressed server, raid 1 via the Windows Os implementation is OK. On small system servers I have used it for years, no problems should occur if done correctly
I would recommend placing the drives on two scsi adapters (duplexing) as it is slightly safer and faster. Both adapter need to be exactly the same make, model and have the same firmware/ drivers, as I have seen problems otherwise. Which bring to the point, with the cost of 2 sci adapters, you would be in the range of a high quality dual channel raid adapter. Throughput with OS or hardware raid 1 are similar
For raid 5 I would not even consider OS based implementation
Aside from the overhead, due to the motherboard managing I/O, the CPU overhead involved with parity creation, it would require using Dynamic disks, adding another possible point of failure. High quality hardware raids offload the the CPU/motherboard processing of >25% for a raid 5 system, 25% more CPU power is considerable. OS coruption can affect Dynamic disk,; sometimes resurection is possible with great effort, other times it leads to disaster.
- Thread starter
- #4
Thanks for the points... This server will not be doing too much. It will only be doing Terminal Services for about 3-4 users and I was planning also moving my Trend Updating/Information master server to this box. All critical data and apps are on other servers with HW RAIDs as you both suggest.
- Status