Filegroups, Raid Arrays, and bears

[ryansupak]

Hi, I've got a large GIS database that is expanding all the time. It's about to be accessible via the web, so speed is a big concern.

After running Profiler to determine how people access the data, I noticed that there are basically 3 distinct groups of tables that are accessed simultaneously, and all the time.

Currently the machine has 6 physical drives in a RAID 5 array. I have the understanding that separating these "Big Filegroups" wouldn't really help with access times, under this RAID configuration.

Would I be better off switching the 6 physical drives to three RAID 0 arrays, each containing two physical drives? i know i'd lose data security by doing this, but that's a sacrifice I'm willing to make since there are daily tape backups being done...

thanks for any hints,
rs

 

[sguslan]

What about adding a new disk subsystem with it's own dedicated SCSI controller and make that RAID0 or RAID5. RAID 0 is of course faster. If you do so, dedicate the new drives to the filegruops holding the active tables...or better yet split the active tables between the 2 disk subsystems.. ________________________________________________________________________________
If you do not like change, get out of the IT business...