Cant anyone help me out on this? Im setting up an exchange server and Im tring to find out what partitions and drive configurations are used for Exchange server. I will have a RAID server with the OS(w2k3) in RAID 1 and 3 drives in RAID 5 to support the Exchange files. While browsing the MS website it states multiple partitions to create for exchange to work properly. What the real deal from some of you experienced Exhange administrators out there? Do I really nedd all those partitions? How do you have your servers setup?
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!
Exhchange partition and drives
- Thread starter Smeglor
- Start date
You want to seperately protect your databases and your transaction logs (assuming you're going to turn off circular logging, which is always a good idea on a production mailbox server).
Received wisdom on larger servers is to have a mirrored pair for your transaction logs, and put the databases on a seperate RAID5 array. The main point of this is to try and seperate the logs out to seperate physical spindles, which makes writing the logs much faster - and they're the bottleneck for user response (database transactions are committed to the db in the background when the server isn't busy). Otherwise, your heads spend all their time skipping between the sequentially-written transaction logs and the db files.
Having said that, this is for optimum performance on big servers. The latest SCSI controllers are faster, though, so if you have a modern flashy server, you could get away with having a single RAID 5 array and partitioning it to hold both the databases on one logical drive, and the logs on another.
Received wisdom on larger servers is to have a mirrored pair for your transaction logs, and put the databases on a seperate RAID5 array. The main point of this is to try and seperate the logs out to seperate physical spindles, which makes writing the logs much faster - and they're the bottleneck for user response (database transactions are committed to the db in the background when the server isn't busy). Otherwise, your heads spend all their time skipping between the sequentially-written transaction logs and the db files.
Having said that, this is for optimum performance on big servers. The latest SCSI controllers are faster, though, so if you have a modern flashy server, you could get away with having a single RAID 5 array and partitioning it to hold both the databases on one logical drive, and the logs on another.
- Thread starter
- #3
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question